BREAKING: Johns Hopkins & American College of Pediatricians Formerly Denounce Sex-Change Procedures

[Silhouette]

That's not how the law reads in post #9 on page 1. It's child abuse. Punishable by law. With this announcement a jury has to find for child abuse....Let me know when you get an official refuting statement. I'd like the link to that publication.

The 50-200 members of the American College of Pediatricians does not get to decide what constitutes the crime of "child abuse".

I don't think you understand what the word "official" means.

I do. It's a body more authoritative than legislatures on the topic of child physiology and psychology. Let me know when you get a refuting link.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

No one is worried about the views of your loons, Sil.

And ask them to explain XY females and XX males, then XXY XXXY, XYY, XYYY, XXYY, and X0. TY...

No one is worried about the views of your loons, Sil.

And ask them to explain XY females and XX males, then XXY XXXY, XYY, XYYY, XXYY, and X0. TY...

OK, this really is simple: biologically, an XY "female" is a MALE and an XX "male" is a FEMALE. An individual can pretend to be anything they wish, but the fact remains, they are biologically one of the other. While there are other genetic anomalies (Kleinfelter's Syndrome or XYY syndrome), they are not common and are commonly classified as anomalies when they do occur. Chemical and surgical engineering of an individual's external appearance in order to accommodate their "perceived" choice of gender fails to alter the biological FACT of their natural identity. No amount of wishing, hoping, chemical & surgical mutilation, or legislation and coercion will ever change the fact that a genetically normal XX or XY person will be anything but Female or Male.

So, the two "girls" above, and the "boy", what locker rooms do they use and does it say, Male or Female, on their records? Go...

XY female one =
XY female two =
XX male one =

Let me ask this...while they may like to look like the opposite sex, what are their sexual interests. Do they "feel" like an XY "female" but still have an interest in girls as sexual partners (or vise-versa)?

They are almost always heterosexual, if you call XY fucking XY heterosexual. They are, female. To be truly heterosexual they'd be fucking XX but that would look like two girls in bed (and I want pictures)...

I still insist they attend the facilities appropriate for the physical manifestation of their genetic determination. If it has a dick, it goes to the boys' locker room/restroom, if not, it goes to the girls' locker room/restroom. Unless alterations have already been made to accommodate their "feelings". I do believe that those alterations in childhood, early teens are the subject of this thread.

You’re at liberty to ‘insist’ whatever you want – but such advocacy is devoid of merit given the right of citizens to express themselves as individuals, and to conduct their lives as they see fit.

That you and others on the right might have an unwarranted fear and contempt for transgender persons doesn’t justify your seeking to disadvantage them, or subjecting them to humiliation, for no other reason than who they are, predicated solely on your unwarranted fear and intolerance.

 

[Silhouette]

People should always and rightfully fear something abnormal insisting it be called normal, especially when to do so amounts to child abuse. Be afraid one and all. Embrace it. ACT upon it.

 

[theDoctorisIn]

That's not how the law reads in post #9 on page 1. It's child abuse. Punishable by law. With this announcement a jury has to find for child abuse....Let me know when you get an official refuting statement. I'd like the link to that publication.

The 50-200 members of the American College of Pediatricians does not get to decide what constitutes the crime of "child abuse".

I don't think you understand what the word "official" means.

I do. It's a body more authoritative than legislatures on the topic of child physiology and psychology. Let me know when you get a refuting link.

I don't need a link to "refute" your inane logic, Sil. Your argument doesn't make any sense.

The American College of Pediatrician's opinion has exactly zero legal weight. They have no "authority" over anything.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

I do. It's a body more authoritative than legislatures on the topic of child physiology and psychology. Let me know when you get a refuting link.

It has exactly zero authority.

Just a bunch of homophobes, like you.

 

[Silhouette]

I don't need a link to "refute" your inane logic, Sil. Your argument doesn't make any sense.

The American College of Pediatrician's opinion has exactly zero legal weight. They have no "authority" over anything.

Their scientific conclusions would have heavy weight in a court of law. So your statement is factually incorrect. Let me know when you get that link for refuting expert testimony, OK?

This shit is going to end up in court. We all know it will. So let's just draw up opposing expert testimony now and get prepared for the inevitable. Get that link when you can..

 

[theDoctorisIn]

I don't need a link to "refute" your inane logic, Sil. Your argument doesn't make any sense.

The American College of Pediatrician's opinion has exactly zero legal weight. They have no "authority" over anything.

Their scientific conclusions would have heavy weight in a court of law. So your statement is factually incorrect. Let me know when you get that link for refuting expert testimony, OK?

This shit is going to end up in court. We all know it will. So let's just draw up opposing expert testimony now and get prepared for the inevitable. Get that link when you can..

Why would the "scientific conclusions" of an ideological interest group have any weight in a court of law?

 

[Silhouette]

Why would the "scientific conclusions" of an ideological interest group have any weight in a court of law?

Since when is Johns Hopkins an "ideological interest group"? Even if they were it would be their credentials and the ACP credentials vs...what was the refuting study or publication it was that you were saying refuted the OP again? Link?.... Tell me it isn't the APA because if you want to "go there" with outfits that are pimping for ideological groups..we can "go there"...

 

[PaintMyHouse]

Why would the "scientific conclusions" of an ideological interest group have any weight in a court of law?

Since when is Johns Hopkins an "ideological interest group"?

These people are Johns Hopkins? No...

 

[theDoctorisIn]

Why would the "scientific conclusions" of an ideological interest group have any weight in a court of law?

Since when is Johns Hopkins an "ideological interest group"?

Johns Hopkins didn't publish, let alone "write" that paper.

 

[theDoctorisIn]

Why would the "scientific conclusions" of an ideological interest group have any weight in a court of law?

Since when is Johns Hopkins an "ideological interest group"? Even if they were it would be their credentials and the ACP credentials vs...what was the refuting study or publication it was that you were saying refuted the OP again? Link?.... Tell me it isn't the APA because if you want to "go there" with outfits that are pimping for ideological groups..we can "go there"...

Your opinion notwithstanding, the APA has quite a bit more "pull" in the scientific and medical community than the ACP does. But that's beside the point.

The ACP doesn't have "credentials" in this field - the "credentials" belong with the AAP, being that it represents the vast majority of pediatricians in this country. I've linked to their opinions on LGBT children already in this thread.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

Why would the "scientific conclusions" of an ideological interest group have any weight in a court of law?

Since when is Johns Hopkins an "ideological interest group"? Even if they were it would be their credentials and the ACP credentials vs...what was the refuting study or publication it was that you were saying refuted the OP again? Link?.... Tell me it isn't the APA because if you want to "go there" with outfits that are pimping for ideological groups..we can "go there"...

Your opinion notwithstanding, the APA has quite a bit more "pull" in the scientific and medical community than the ACP does. But that's beside the point.

The ACP doesn't have "credentials" in this field - the "credentials" belong with the AAP, being that it represents the vast majority of pediatricians in this country. I've linked to their opinions on LGBT children already in this thread.

Sil would quote Kermit the Frog, if he hated the faggots like she does.

It's Not Easy Being Gay.

 

[SuperDemocrat]

American College of Pediatricians is a tiny, conservative breakaway group from the much-larger and more respected American Academy of Pediatrics, and the views of one Johns Hopkins professor are not representative of the school as a whole.

And that makes it totally wrong because it may be a conservative group.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

American College of Pediatricians is a tiny, conservative breakaway group from the much-larger and more respected American Academy of Pediatrics, and the views of one Johns Hopkins professor are not representative of the school as a whole.

And that makes it totally wrong because it may be a conservative group.

It's a group that was started to oppose homosexuals adopting children. Just a bunch of religious hacks.

 

[theDoctorisIn]

American College of Pediatricians is a tiny, conservative breakaway group from the much-larger and more respected American Academy of Pediatrics, and the views of one Johns Hopkins professor are not representative of the school as a whole.

And that makes it totally wrong because it may be a conservative group.

No, the fact that they're a conservative group doesn't make them "totally wrong" - their opinions make them "totally wrong".

But I'm not talking about "right" and "wrong" in the post you responded to - I'm talking about scientific and medical consensus.

 

[Political Junky]

This is comparable to the Right finding a handful of "scientists" who denounce Global Warming.

 

[Silhouette]

American College of Pediatricians is a tiny, conservative breakaway group from the much-larger and more respected American Academy of Pediatrics, and the views of one Johns Hopkins professor are not representative of the school as a whole.

And that makes it totally wrong because it may be a conservative group.

So logic follows that the APA which is a totally liberal progressive group is equally as unauthoritative. The point of the OP is that what sex a child is isn't determined by ideology of either kind; but instead raw science. With peer-reviewed studies to back it up.

And, anyone attempting to drug or cut into a child to change that child's healthy normal XX or XY body into something it isn't and can never be is guilty of child abuse. Pretty straightforward, non-idiological stuff..

No, the fact that they're a conservative group doesn't make them "totally wrong" - their opinions make them "totally wrong".

But I'm not talking about "right" and "wrong" in the post you responded to - I'm talking about scientific and medical consensus.

So you're saying the peer-reviewed studies and information cited in the OP, including dysphoria being listed as a mental disorder in the DSM are "all bunk", "totally wrong" eh? What gives you that authority? All those folks are in consensus and they amount to more than just the American College of Pediatrics, the American Association of Pediatrics (by silent assent) and Johns Hopkins. The big guns have spoken (or failed to speak in dissent). Until they speak, ,we assume a consensus.

Again, I await ANY OF YOU posting an official refuting publication and its authorities. I'd like a link to that document...

 

[iamwhatiseem]

American College of Pediatricians is a tiny, conservative breakaway group from the much-larger and more respected American Academy of Pediatrics, and the views of one Johns Hopkins professor are not representative of the school as a whole.

Regardless, a parent or guardian with mental issues should not be able to choose to change the sex of a child via surgery because little Johnny wears dresses that they conveniently hung in his closet after reading to him 3 LGBT books a night for a month.

 

[hazlnut]

The politics and push for laws to normalize the abnormal just got turned on their head:

Leading medical authorities call coercion of children to use hormones or have 'sex change' surgery "child abuse". Finally the experts grow a pair.

From the official statement: Gender Ideology Harms Children
*****
Gender Ideology Harms Children
March 21, 2016 – a temporary statement with references. A full statement will be published in summer 2016.

The American College of Pediatricians urges educators and legislators to reject all policies that condition children to accept as normal a life of chemical and surgical impersonation of the opposite sex. Facts – not ideology – determine reality.

1. Human sexuality is an objective biological binary trait: “XY” and “XX” are genetic markers of health – not genetic markers of a disorder. The norm for human design is to be conceived either male or female. Human sexuality is binary by design with the obvious purpose being the reproduction and flourishing of our species. This principle is self-evident. The exceedingly rare disorders of sex development (DSDs), including but not limited to testicular feminization and congenital adrenal hyperplasia, are all medically identifiable deviations from the sexual binary norm, and are rightly recognized as disorders of human design. Individuals with DSDs do not constitute a third sex.1

2. No one is born with a gender. Everyone is born with a biological sex. Gender (an awareness and sense of oneself as male or female) is a sociological and psychological concept; not an objective biological one. No one is born with an awareness of themselves as male or female; this awareness develops over time and, like all developmental processes, may be derailed by a child’s subjective perceptions, relationships, and adverse experiences from infancy forward. People who identify as “feeling like the opposite sex” or “somewhere in between” do not comprise a third sex. They remain biological men or biological women.2,3,4

3. A person’s belief that he or she is something they are not is, at best, a sign of confused thinking. When an otherwise healthy biological boy believes he is a girl, or an otherwise healthy biological girl believes she is a boy, an objective psychological problem exists that lies in the mind not the body, and it should be treated as such. These children suffer from gender dysphoria. Gender dysphoria (GD), formerly listed as Gender Identity Disorder (GID), is a recognized mental disorder in the most recent edition of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of the American Psychiatric Association (DSM-V).5 The psychodynamic and social learning theories of GD/GID have never been disproved.2,4,5

4. Puberty is not a disease and puberty-blocking hormones can be dangerous. Reversible or not, puberty- blocking hormones induce a state of disease – the absence of puberty – and inhibit growth and fertility in a previously biologically healthy child.6

5. According to the DSM-V, as many as 98% of gender confused boys and 88% of gender confused girls eventually accept their biological sex after naturally passing through puberty.5

6. Children who use puberty blockers to impersonate the opposite sex will require cross-sex hormones in late adolescence. Cross-sex hormones (testosterone and estrogen) are associated with dangerous health risks including but not limited to high blood pressure, blood clots, stroke and cancer.7,8,9,10

7. Rates of suicide are twenty times greater among adults who use cross-sex hormones and undergo sex reassignment surgery, even in Sweden which is among the most LGBQT – affirming countries.11 What compassionate and reasonable person would condemn young children to this fate knowing that after puberty as many as 88% of girls and 98% of boys will eventually accept reality and achieve a state of mental and physical health?

8. Conditioning children into believing a lifetime of chemical and surgical impersonation of the opposite sex is normal and healthful is child abuse. Endorsing gender discordance as normal via public education and legal policies will confuse children and parents, leading more children to present to “gender clinics” where they will be given puberty-blocking drugs. This, in turn, virtually ensures that they will “choose” a lifetime of carcinogenic and otherwise toxic cross-sex hormones, and likely consider unnecessary surgical mutilation of their healthy body parts as young adults.

Michelle A. Cretella, M.D.
President of the American College of Pediatricians

Quentin Van Meter, M.D.
Vice President of the American College of Pediatricians
Pediatric Endocrinologist

Paul McHugh, M.D.
University Distinguished Service Professor of Psychiatry at Johns Hopkins Medical School and the former psychiatrist in chief at Johns Hopkins Hospital

References:

1. Consortium on the Management of Disorders of Sex Development, “Clinical Guidelines for the Management of Disorders of Sex Development in Childhood.” Intersex Society of North America, March 25, 2006. Accessed 3/20/16 from http://www.dsdguidelines.org/files/clinical.pdf.

2. Zucker, Kenneth J. and Bradley Susan J. “Gender Identity and Psychosexual Disorders.” FOCUS: The Journal of Lifelong Learning in Psychiatry. Vol. III, No. 4, Fall 2005 (598-617).

3. Whitehead, Neil W. “Is Transsexuality biologically determined?” Triple Helix (UK), Autumn 2000, p6-8. accessed 3/20/16 from http://www.mygenes.co.nz/transsexuality.htm; see also Whitehead, Neil W. “Twin Studies of Transsexuals [Reveals Discordance]” accessed 3/20/16 from Twin Studies of Transexuality | transsexuals | transexuality genetic?.

4. Jeffreys, Sheila. Gender Hurts: A Feminist Analysis of the Politics of Transgenderism. Routledge, New York, 2014 (pp.1-35).

5. American Psychiatric Association: Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fifth Edition, Arlington, VA, American Psychiatric Association, 2013 (451-459). See page 455 re: rates of persistence of gender dysphoria.

6. Hembree, WC, et al. Endocrine treatment of transsexual persons: an Endocrine Society clinical practice guideline. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2009;94:3132-3154.

7. Olson-Kennedy, J and Forcier, M. “Overview of the management of gender nonconformity in children and adolescents.” UpToDate November 4, 2015. Accessed 3.20.16 from www.uptodate.com.

8. Moore, E., Wisniewski, & Dobs, A. “Endocrine treatment of transsexual people: A review of treatment regimens, outcomes, and adverse effects.” The Journal of Endocrinology & Metabolism, 2003; 88(9), pp3467-3473.

9. FDA Drug Safety Communication issued for Testosterone products accessed 3.20.16: Testosterone Information.

10. World Health Organization Classification of Estrogen as a Class I Carcinogen: http://www.who.int/reproductivehealth/topics/ageing/cocs_hrt_statement.pdf.

11. Dhejne, C, et.al. “Long-Term Follow-Up of Transsexual Persons Undergoing Sex Reassignment Surgery: Cohort Study in Sweden.” PLoS ONE, 2011; 6(2). Affiliation: Department of Clinical Neuroscience, Division of Psychiatry, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden. Accessed 3.20.16 from Long-Term Follow-Up of Transsexual Persons Undergoing Sex Reassignment Surgery: Cohort Study in Sweden.

This is a front group of conservative homophobes.

Not legitimate doctors.

Not legitimate findings or study.

Sick twisted version of Christianity shitting itself on our society.

Go spew your vile somewhere else.

 

[Silhouette]

Link?