Former Johns Hopkins Chief of Psychiatry Says Trans Movement...

[theDoctorisIn]

There's no question that Dr. McHugh is a smart man. But one paper going against the tide of countless other studies by equally learned men that disagree with him is not "proof" of anything.

 

[emilynghiem]

There's no question that Dr. McHugh is a smart man. But one paper going against the tide of countless other studies by equally learned men that disagree with him is not "proof" of anything.

Sure theDoctorisIn And to be fair, neither are statements "proven" based on what people "believe or feel"
that is not genetically determined as race is, which CAN be proven scientifically not to be the person's "choice of behavior"

At most, at this point, we have battling CREEDS, neither side's beliefs being proven or
disproven. But both sides' BELIEFS going to bat, competing to bully one side down or the other.
The govt should remain neutral and allow either science to prove things
or people to make decisions by consensus or to separate, where BELIEFS are involved.

To chose one set of BELIEFS over another is abuse of govt to DISCRIMINATE BY CREED.
Both sides want and deserve protection from the other sides' creed they don't believe in.

 

[cnm]

"Can Homosexuality be Healed?" by Francis MacNutt

Implies straight off it's a disease. Very open minded.

 

[emilynghiem]

"Can Homosexuality be Healed?" by Francis MacNutt

Implies straight off it's a disease. Very open minded.

Nope, where did you get that? cnm
People who heal a relationship, does that mean they suffered from a disease?
The mind and spirit can be healed of anger, or of unforgiveness, which does
affect our mindset and health, but I wouldn't call those conditions a disease!

People can heal of abuse; and the cases I know about, the homosexual
relations and behavior was unnatural for that person because it was
caused by abuse that wasn't natural.

As for openminded ness, this healing process goes both ways:
people have healed and come out homosexual or heterosexual,
whichever is natural for them by default.

I know of cases of both. So I believe it is up to people spiritually
to determine what is the process and path for them.

How many people are that openminded to accept all the different paths
and processes as up to that person's, and not for any outside
agenda to decide (either way) as right or wrong.

 

[Two Thumbs]

I think we'd have to ask the transgender people and patients to find out what is true for them.

See also what ChrisL posted on Walt Heyer
Sex Change Regret
What The Media Should Know About Walt Heyer And "Transition Regrets"

Clearly we can't judge all Transgender conditions based on ones that were either misdiagnosed or otherwise mistreated. And given so, the question they pose is then why is it deemed acceptable to assume ALL Transgender cases are natural for that person where it is assumed to be healthy to recognize and pursue transition?

Obviously some people are just mentally ill but that doesnt invalidate people that really are transgender.

What further examination will show is that Transgender orientation is FAITH BASED, not proven by science
but open to interpretation. So it should technically be treated more in terms of CREED or BELIEF in what someone wishes to practice
and not be assumed to be on the level of race. Especially if the point is to STRAY from the birth designation, then this is different from race that is genetic.

Who is saying that being transgender is not something you are born with and not just a belief? Its like being gay to me.

you're ignorant and uninformed opinion has been proven wrong.

No. it hasnt been proven wrong. Theories are not proof.

What an idiot

you're opinion, is more right than years of dedicated research.

I've met some arrogant fucks in my life, but you are the fuckiest.

 

[Two Thumbs]

There's no question that Dr. McHugh is a smart man. But one paper going against the tide of countless other studies by equally learned men that disagree with him is not "proof" of anything.

please provide a link to the latest research that counters his.

 

[Geaux4it]

Former?

For someone born in 1931, he'd normally be expected to have retired by now:

======================
In 1992, McHugh announced that he was going to leave Johns Hopkins and accept a position as director and CEO of Friends Hospital in Philadelphia. The Johns Hopkins School of Medicine quickly sought to retain him and was successful in doing so.[5]

Throughout the decade of the 1990s, McHugh was active in debunking the idea of recovered memory—that is, the idea that people could suddenly and spontaneously remember childhood sexual abuse.[4][5]

In 2001, McHugh was appointed by President George W. Bush to the Presidential Council on Bioethics.[12] The Council was charged with the task of making recommendations as to what the U.S. federal government's policy regarding embryonic stem cells should be. McHugh was against using new lines of embryonic stem cells derived from in vitro fertilization but was in favor of the use of stem cells derived from somatic cell nuclear transfer (SCNT). In SCNT, the nucleus of a cell is removed and replaced by another cell nucleus. McHugh felt that cells created in this fashion could be regarded as tissue; whereas, stem cells taken from embryos caused the killing of an unborn child.[13]

In 2002, McHugh was appointed to a lay panel assembled by the Roman Catholic Church to look into sexual abuse by priests.[2]

I guess i was wondering why this guys opinion was valid.

Johns Hopkins

-Geaux

 

[Asclepias]

Obviously some people are just mentally ill but that doesnt invalidate people that really are transgender.

What further examination will show is that Transgender orientation is FAITH BASED, not proven by science
but open to interpretation. So it should technically be treated more in terms of CREED or BELIEF in what someone wishes to practice
and not be assumed to be on the level of race. Especially if the point is to STRAY from the birth designation, then this is different from race that is genetic.

Who is saying that being transgender is not something you are born with and not just a belief? Its like being gay to me.

you're ignorant and uninformed opinion has been proven wrong.

No. it hasnt been proven wrong. Theories are not proof.

What an idiot

you're opinion, is more right than years of dedicated research.

I've met some arrogant fucks in my life, but you are the fuckiest.

I have no proof I am right just like the people that have years of dedicated research are right. Until i see some proof I will stick with my own opinion regardless of how my arrogance causes you heartburn.

 

[Asclepias]

Former?

For someone born in 1931, he'd normally be expected to have retired by now:

======================
In 1992, McHugh announced that he was going to leave Johns Hopkins and accept a position as director and CEO of Friends Hospital in Philadelphia. The Johns Hopkins School of Medicine quickly sought to retain him and was successful in doing so.[5]

Throughout the decade of the 1990s, McHugh was active in debunking the idea of recovered memory—that is, the idea that people could suddenly and spontaneously remember childhood sexual abuse.[4][5]

In 2001, McHugh was appointed by President George W. Bush to the Presidential Council on Bioethics.[12] The Council was charged with the task of making recommendations as to what the U.S. federal government's policy regarding embryonic stem cells should be. McHugh was against using new lines of embryonic stem cells derived from in vitro fertilization but was in favor of the use of stem cells derived from somatic cell nuclear transfer (SCNT). In SCNT, the nucleus of a cell is removed and replaced by another cell nucleus. McHugh felt that cells created in this fashion could be regarded as tissue; whereas, stem cells taken from embryos caused the killing of an unborn child.[13]

In 2002, McHugh was appointed to a lay panel assembled by the Roman Catholic Church to look into sexual abuse by priests.[2]

I guess i was wondering why this guys opinion was valid.

Johns Hopkins

-Geaux

So?

 

[Bob Blaylock]

Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof.

Science, as we know it, is very clear about the distinction between male and female in humans.

To claim that a human who is unambiguously, biologically male, is in any meaningful sense, female, or vice versa, would certainly be a very extraordinary claim. Until anyone can produce equally extraordinary proof, to support such a claim, I think it is by far most rational to assume that the science that we know is correct, and that “transgenderism” is nothing more than a mental illness, comparable to other dysphoric or identity disorders.

Supports of the “transgenderism” madness cannot even come up with anything that qualifies as “ordinary proof” to support their claims, much less anything rising to the level of the extraordinary proof that it would take to give their claims any credibility.

 

[Asclepias]

Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof.

Science, as we know it, is very clear about the distinction between male and female in humans.

To claim that a human who is unambiguously, biologically male, is in any meaningful sense, female, or vice versa, would certainly be a very extraordinary claim. Until anyone can produce equally extraordinary proof, to support such a claim, I think it is by far most rational to assume that the science that we know is correct, and that “transgenderism” is nothing more than a mental illness, comparable to other dysphoric or identity disorders.

Supports of the “transgenderism” madness cannot even come up with anything that qualifies as “ordinary proof” to support their claims, much less anything rising to the level of the extraordinary proof that it would take to give their claims any credibility.

If one were to subscribe to your illogical train of thought we would still think the world was flat.

 

[Bob Blaylock]

Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof.

Science, as we know it, is very clear about the distinction between male and female in humans.

To claim that a human who is unambiguously, biologically male, is in any meaningful sense, female, or vice versa, would certainly be a very extraordinary claim. Until anyone can produce equally extraordinary proof, to support such a claim, I think it is by far most rational to assume that the science that we know is correct, and that “transgenderism” is nothing more than a mental illness, comparable to other dysphoric or identity disorders.

Supports of the “transgenderism” madness cannot even come up with anything that qualifies as “ordinary proof” to support their claims, much less anything rising to the level of the extraordinary proof that it would take to give their claims any credibility.

If one were to subscribe to your illogical train of thought we would still think the world was flat.

You cannot really be so dumb as to not realize just how nonsensical that statement is.

No matter how strongly anyone might have ever believed the world to be flat, we now have solid proof that it is not.

We have no credible evidence at all that someone who is biologically male can, in any meaningful sense, be female, or vice versa; and an overwhelming body of scientific evidence to the contrary.

 

[IndependantAce]

Former John Hopkins Chief of Psychiatry Drops Another TRUTH BOMB About Transgenderism...


Former Chief of Psychiatry at Johns Hopkins Hospital and Distinguished Service Professor of Psychiatry at Johns Hopkins University Dr. Paul R. McHugh blasted the Left’s transgender movement, saying that those who enable the metal illness of transgenderism are “collaborating with madness.” McHugh warns against sex-reassignment surgery in particular.

The esteemed PHD has studied transgenderism and sex-reassignment surgery for 40 years, notes CNS News.

In the doctor’s book, The Mind Has Mountains: Reflections on Society and Psychiatry, McHugh says that he’s “witnessed a great deal of damage from sex reassignment.”


“We psychiatrists, I thought, would do better to concentrate on trying to fix their minds and not their genitalia,” said McHugh.

The doctor explained that trans people, those who don’t identify as their biological sex, exude behaviors of “sexual misdirection,” called “autogynephilia.” Such behaviors do not cease post-op:

For the post-surgery transgender men, data collected by one of McHugh’s colleagues showed that most of the patients did not regret the genitalia change “ut in every other respect, they were little changed in their psychological condition,” said Dr. McHugh. “They had the same problems with relationships, work, and emotions as before.”

So if it's not helping them, and the surgeons know or should know, why is this allowed?

If someone is cutting themselves you do everything to get them help, but is someone wants someone else to cut them....


This has nothing to do with marriage or bathrooms, this has everything to do with doctors victimizing the mentally - emotionally ill.
That's what it seems like to me.

I honestly doesn't see how sex change is any different than Josef Mengele's Nazi human experiments in which he tried to change the eye color of his "patients".

It should be criminalized as malpractice.

 

[Two Thumbs]

What further examination will show is that Transgender orientation is FAITH BASED, not proven by science
but open to interpretation. So it should technically be treated more in terms of CREED or BELIEF in what someone wishes to practice
and not be assumed to be on the level of race. Especially if the point is to STRAY from the birth designation, then this is different from race that is genetic.

Who is saying that being transgender is not something you are born with and not just a belief? Its like being gay to me.

you're ignorant and uninformed opinion has been proven wrong.

No. it hasnt been proven wrong. Theories are not proof.

What an idiot

you're opinion, is more right than years of dedicated research.

I've met some arrogant fucks in my life, but you are the fuckiest.

I have no proof I am right just like the people that have years of dedicated research are right. Until i see some proof I will stick with my own opinion regardless of how my arrogance causes you heartburn.

you want proof?

read the link in the op, then goto the links on that site.

 

[Two Thumbs]

Former John Hopkins Chief of Psychiatry Drops Another TRUTH BOMB About Transgenderism...


Former Chief of Psychiatry at Johns Hopkins Hospital and Distinguished Service Professor of Psychiatry at Johns Hopkins University Dr. Paul R. McHugh blasted the Left’s transgender movement, saying that those who enable the metal illness of transgenderism are “collaborating with madness.” McHugh warns against sex-reassignment surgery in particular.

The esteemed PHD has studied transgenderism and sex-reassignment surgery for 40 years, notes CNS News.

In the doctor’s book, The Mind Has Mountains: Reflections on Society and Psychiatry, McHugh says that he’s “witnessed a great deal of damage from sex reassignment.”


“We psychiatrists, I thought, would do better to concentrate on trying to fix their minds and not their genitalia,” said McHugh.

The doctor explained that trans people, those who don’t identify as their biological sex, exude behaviors of “sexual misdirection,” called “autogynephilia.” Such behaviors do not cease post-op:

For the post-surgery transgender men, data collected by one of McHugh’s colleagues showed that most of the patients did not regret the genitalia change “ut in every other respect, they were little changed in their psychological condition,” said Dr. McHugh. “They had the same problems with relationships, work, and emotions as before.”

So if it's not helping them, and the surgeons know or should know, why is this allowed?

If someone is cutting themselves you do everything to get them help, but is someone wants someone else to cut them....


This has nothing to do with marriage or bathrooms, this has everything to do with doctors victimizing the mentally - emotionally ill.
That's what it seems like to me.

I honestly doesn't see how sex change is any different than Josef Mengele's Nazi human experiments in which he tried to change the eye color of his "patients".

It should be criminalized as malpractice.

one was force the other is misleading someone to get their consent.

 

[IndependantAce]

In all honesty I think a bullet would be a better cure for some people's disease than mutilating their genitalia.

Tbe one good thing about tranny homicide and suicide is that at least it's a quicker and more painless death than their miserable existences of self defilement.

If the left wanted "the greatest good for the greatest number of people" they should encourage tranny mortality.

 

[OZman]

In all honesty I think a bullet would be a better cure for some people's disease than mutilating their genitalia.

Tbe one good thing about tranny homicide and suicide is that at least it's a quicker and more painless death than their miserable existences of self defilement.

If the left wanted "the greatest good for the greatest number of people" they should encourage tranny mortality.

What a disgusting POS you are, you fundamentalist moron.

 

[IndependantAce]

In all honesty I think a bullet would be a better cure for some people's disease than mutilating their genitalia.

Tbe one good thing about tranny homicide and suicide is that at least it's a quicker and more painless death than their miserable existences of self defilement.

If the left wanted "the greatest good for the greatest number of people" they should encourage tranny mortality.

What a disgusting POS you are, you fundamentalist moron.

Sometimes the "old yeller" method seems like the only merciful solution.

 

[OZman]

In all honesty I think a bullet would be a better cure for some people's disease than mutilating their genitalia.

Tbe one good thing about tranny homicide and suicide is that at least it's a quicker and more painless death than their miserable existences of self defilement.

If the left wanted "the greatest good for the greatest number of people" they should encourage tranny mortality.

What a disgusting POS you are, you fundamentalist moron.

Sometimes the "old yeller" method seems like the only merciful solution.

Yes, you can be sure that your fundamentalist "Christian" bigotry has contributed greatly to the suicide level of Transgender individuals. You must be so proud.

 

[emilynghiem]

Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof.

Science, as we know it, is very clear about the distinction between male and female in humans.

To claim that a human who is unambiguously, biologically male, is in any meaningful sense, female, or vice versa, would certainly be a very extraordinary claim. Until anyone can produce equally extraordinary proof, to support such a claim, I think it is by far most rational to assume that the science that we know is correct, and that “transgenderism” is nothing more than a mental illness, comparable to other dysphoric or identity disorders.

Supports of the “transgenderism” madness cannot even come up with anything that qualifies as “ordinary proof” to support their claims, much less anything rising to the level of the extraordinary proof that it would take to give their claims any credibility.

If one were to subscribe to your illogical train of thought we would still think the world was flat.

You cannot really be so dumb as to not realize just how nonsensical that statement is.

No matter how strongly anyone might have ever believed the world to be flat, we now have solid proof that it is not.

We have no credible evidence at all that someone who is biologically male can, in any meaningful sense, be female, or vice versa; and an overwhelming body of scientific evidence to the contrary.

Dear Bob Blaylock Asclepias and Two Thumbs
I thought the issues were whether we could prove or disprove the beliefs of transgender as being female personalities or souls being born in male bodies, male personalities or souls born in female bodies and whether it is more natural and therapeutic to counsel them toward identifying and transitioning to their physical gender or toward their identity that doesn't match their bodies.

I argue since this is a spiritual faith based process, it can't be either dictated or penalized by govt what ppls beliefs are, who cannot be forced to change by govt. It must remain free choice even when using science because the internal personality identity can never be proven but remains faith based like someone's religion.

The closest equivalent is on the level of Christian arguments of counting the life spirit will and rights of the unborn child before birth which is equally faith based. So if you are going to nix that as off limits for govt to base laws on, the same can be said of transgender arguments. Ppl have the right to exercise their beliefs in private but can't impose on the beliefs of the public by force of law. It must be chosen by free will because beliefs are involved no matter how much science you cite, similar to prolife arguments using science. Some of it is spiritual and requires faith to make leaps.