bluebell Posted October 9 Share Posted October 9 18 minutes ago, smac97 said: Could you provide references for these statistics? Same here. Thanks, -Smac https://www.statista.com/statistics/191226/reported-forcible-rape-rate-in-the-us-since-1990/#:~:text=As the FBI revised the,forcible rapes per 100%2C000 inhabitants. https://www.nsvrc.org/sites/default/files/publications_nsvrc_factsheet_media-packet_statistics-about-sexual-violence_0.pdf (second page) 2 Link to comment
california boy Posted October 9 Share Posted October 9 (edited) 1 hour ago, smac97 said: Whether you think Chloe's friends and family should encourage her in her pursuit of elective surgery that will render her paralyzed for the rest of her life. Whether you think Chloe's friends and family should help her pay this surgeon for a procedure to permanently sever her nerves and render her paralyzed for the rest of her life. I did not ask whether Chloe's life is hers, whether she has to decide how to live it, of what she should do. Instead, I asked you what her friends and family should do. Do you think Chloe's friends and family should encourage her in her pursuit of elective surgery that will render her paralyzed for the rest of her life? Should Chloe's friends and family help her pay this surgeon for a procedure to permanently sever her nerves and render her paralyzed for the rest of her life? I did not ask you about how they feel. I asked what you think they should do. I cannot conceptualize any set of "reasons" (an interesting word choice) for a person to electively paralyze herself, particularly one who is clearly suffering from a severe mental health disorder. "Reason" is not part of Chloe's thought processes. "I would not support her decision." Thank you for responding. I would not support her either, for the reasons set forth above and below. Why would you not support her decision? Not really. Do you think Chloe's friends and family should encourage her in her pursuit of elective surgery that will render her paralyzed for the rest of her life? Smac: No. I think electively paralyzing an otherwise healthy person is not an acceptable or ethical form of medical treatment. I think her friends and family should not encourage her, and would instead do all they could to persuade her to seek help for her mental disorder. Should Chloe's friends and family help her pay this surgeon for a procedure to permanently sever her nerves and render her paralyzed for the rest of her life? Smac: No. I think Chloe's friends and family should neither encourage or help pay for a medical procedure that electively paralyzes her for life. I'm pretty clearly opposed to electively chopping off perfectly healthy body parts of a person suffering from a mental disorder, even if (especially if) that person really, really wants to cut off an leg, or render her paralyzed for life, or blind herself, or cut off her breasts, or cut off her penis, or undergo medical treatment that will render her or him sterile for life, etc. No, I don not think that. But feel free to elaborate. What "situation" might exist that would justify a person in amputating a perfectly healthy leg? Or in undergoing a surgical procedure to deliberately sever her nerves and paralyze her for life? I haven't said that either. Do you think there are circumstances where a minor should have healthy body parts chopped off, or undergo medical treatment rendering her sterile for life? If so, what are these circumstances? The most common one I see floated is the "it's better than suicide" or the "let me have this surgery or else I'll kill myself" ultimatum. Do you subscribe to this notion? I have not said this. I disagree with it. I have not said this. I disagree with it. Yes. Big time. Foreclosing one option for a minor (to undergo massively important, irreversible, life-altering, sterilizing medical procedures) does not mean there is only "one {other} answer" left. Similarly, a person contemplating suicide has more than one alternative options. As a public policy matter, and as regarding the elective procedures under discussion, no. Thanks, -Smac You know honestly, I can't answer your posts when you fisk every single sentence, take things out of context, even break up individual sentences. I gave what I believe to be very clear answers. And they are clear until you slice and dice every single sentence. When you do that, the whole post becomes a confusing and incoherent mess. This is not a discussion, this is you trying to take things out of context, go off on tangents that are not even suggested in the context of the paragraphs i wrote. Edit: I see I am not the only one who don't feel like you are able to take things in context and comment on what is actually posted. This is not a court of law where the objective is to confuse answers given and make a mess of what the person is saying. It is a discussion board. Taking things in context is kinda critical in moving a conversation forward. I wish you were capable of discussing issues rather than obscuring the points a poster makes. But I doubt you will ever change. You seem to thrive on creating misunderstandings and injecting completely irrelevant facts into post that have nothing to do with your comments. Case in point is to even bring up someone who wants surgery to become paralyzed. What the heck does that have to do with the best way to understand and deal with gender issues??? There. Said my piece. Edited October 9 by california boy 1 Link to comment
Popular Post SeekingUnderstanding Posted October 9 Popular Post Share Posted October 9 (edited) I must say the seeming backlash to the #metoo movement baffles me. Its sole purpose seems to be the ability to normalize talking about sexual assault and harassment. Both of which are ubiquitous in society as far as I can tell. If my wife attends a business function and attends a social function without male companionship odds are very close to 100 percent she will be harrassed. She makes conscious choices to avoid this. As for assault, she was groped in a hot tub last year despite making the conscious choice to only go with several other women. I could only wish this was the only time she was assaulted in her life, but this incident is relatively minor compared to others. Tracking successful criminal prosecutions provides an interesting data point, but if you want to know and understand maybe you should talk (and LISTEN) to more of the women around you. (Isn’t that the idea behind metoo?) Edited October 9 by SeekingUnderstanding 6 Link to comment
Calm Posted October 9 Share Posted October 9 14 minutes ago, SeekingUnderstanding said: Isn’t that the idea behind metoo?) Yes Link to comment
Popular Post california boy Posted October 9 Popular Post Share Posted October 9 Yesterday, my partner and I needed to go downtown to meet a friend for lunch. We were at the bus stop waiting for the bus to come. But something was going on and the bus kept getting delayed. So we decided to take a Waymo car. For those unfamiliar with Waymo, they are the self driving cars that are ubiquitous in San Francisco. There was a woman at the bus stop also waiting for the bus to take her downtown. We clicked on the app and 3 minutes later found ourselves for the first time in a self driving car. Without a driver, we were chatting with the woman that was sharing our ride with. I asked her what she liked best about Waymo. Her first response was that she didn't have to worry about getting in a strange car with a driver she knew nothing about and trust that he would take her to where she needed to go without any worry of aggression towards her. I honestly don't think most men have any idea how often a woman feels vulnerable because of past experiences they have had with aggressive men. Not listening to women and dismissing their experiences only exasterbates the situation and makes them feel even more vulnerable. 11 Link to comment
Popular Post bluebell Posted October 9 Popular Post Share Posted October 9 2 minutes ago, smac97 said: Here, there aren't really "two sides" when it comes to sexual assault. No decent person justifies such behaviors in any way. Rather, the disputes seem to come down to matters such as prevalence, definitions, mitigating and remedial measures, criminal procedure and enforcement, and so on. Thanks, -Smac I agree. It's just that decent people struggle to believe women who claim they were raped. So there's an obvious disconnect somewhere that goes deeper than disputes about definitions and prevalence. Decent people can be incredibly indecent when it comes to this topic. I remember hearing recordings of people (both men and women) calling into a radio station in support of a football player for University of Montana, saying horrible things about the woman who accused him of rape (and threatening her and her family) and refusing to believe he could possibly have done it. This was despite the fact that he was basically caught in the act, confessed to police, and was actually convicted and spent time in prison for the crime. Even after all of this came out in the trial, "decent people" refused to believe he had had raped the woman (a childhood friend that he had known since they were both kids and who he considered to be like a sister). He had a long line of prestigious people attend the sentencing part of his trial as character witnesses for him, explaining to the court how he was one of the "decent" ones. And this story was mirrored in other sexual assaults reported on that campus around the same time, all that had similar results in terms of community support for the rapists. 1 in 4 women will be sexually assaulted during their lifetime and less than 5% of those assaults will be reported to the police. Of that "less than 5%", the police will determine that one in five is baseless. Less than 1% of the "less than 5%" will end up going to trial (with prosecutors often declining to go to trial regardless of the desires of the victim or the evidence) and .7% of that 1% of that less than 5% will get a conviction. It's the 'decent people' that refuse to believe women and who vilify them and blame them for the sexual assaults that are driving these kinds of statistics. Decent people can justify a lot, when it serves their purposes or their needs. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9136376/ https://www.uml.edu/news/stories/2019/sexual_assault_research.aspx#:~:text=Ultimately%2C the study found that,of cases%2C the researchers say. 6 Link to comment
longview Posted October 9 Share Posted October 9 19 hours ago, california boy said: I am putting my trust that the parents of the child and the doctor responsible for the care of that child are the only ones qualified to make medical decisions I am pretty sure that you would agree that there is a segment of those people that do NOT always make rational decisions. Some do it to gain acclaim from their woke and/or radical associates. The child do it for the excitement or praise from people around him/her/it. The point is surgical mutilation or chemical castration are IRREVERSIBLE and a lifelong desolation of abominations. @smac97 has documented numerous examples that call into question their poor judgement. This made me think of massive holocaust of certain religions in the past. Such as Baal requiring parents to sacrifice their children or making them walk thru fire. Terah sacrificing his son Abram (Abraham) being a well-known example. Link to comment
SeekingUnderstanding Posted October 9 Share Posted October 9 19 minutes ago, longview said: I am pretty sure that you would agree that there is a segment of those people that do NOT always make rational decisions. Some do it to gain acclaim from their woke and/or radical associates. The child do it for the excitement or praise from people around him/her/it. The point is surgical mutilation or chemical castration are IRREVERSIBLE and a lifelong desolation of abominations. @smac97 has documented numerous examples that call into question their poor judgement. This made me think of massive holocaust of certain religions in the past. Such as Baal requiring parents to sacrifice their children or making them walk thru fire. Terah sacrificing his son Abram (Abraham) being a well-known example. Posts like this are what make this issue difficult to talk about let alone legislate. People talk about “caring for children” but their religious hatred of trans people existing makes it hard to take any of their arguments at face value. I do think there are people arguing from good faith to restrict access to this procedure, and I think sensible precautions could be agreed upon by most, but it’s hard to separate facts from fear mongering when it’s hard to tell if their real motivation is like Longview here. 2 Link to comment
ZealouslyStriving Posted October 10 Share Posted October 10 (edited) 9 hours ago, bluebell said: Are we really wanting to argue though that the child should always get what they want? Children are considered minors for a reason. What they want isn't always what is best for them. Agreed. By that logic minor children should be able to smoke, drink, use legal drugs and sext as long their parents are cool with it. Edited October 10 by ZealouslyStriving Link to comment
california boy Posted October 10 Share Posted October 10 1 hour ago, longview said: I am pretty sure that you would agree that there is a segment of those people that do NOT always make rational decisions. Some do it to gain acclaim from their woke and/or radical associates. The child do it for the excitement or praise from people around him/her/it. The point is surgical mutilation or chemical castration are IRREVERSIBLE and a lifelong desolation of abominations. @smac97 has documented numerous examples that call into question their poor judgement. This made me think of massive holocaust of certain religions in the past. Such as Baal requiring parents to sacrifice their children or making them walk thru fire. Terah sacrificing his son Abram (Abraham) being a well-known example. Of course there are always those that make bad decisions. But for the most part, I think parents try to always have the best intentions in helping their children make the best decisions for their happiness. I also believe that having a doctor, a neutral party in the decision process helps parents from going off the rails. And requiring a course to educate and test for understanding of the issues of those involved in making those decisions helps everyone make an informed and educated decision. We also have to acknowledge that politicians and people reporting on the internet don't always make the best decisions either. This is such an individual decision, there is no answer that works for the best at all times. By far, the last place to base a decision on is random people posting on the internet who have no idea about what the child might need that is best for them. 3 Link to comment
longview Posted October 10 Share Posted October 10 3 hours ago, SeekingUnderstanding said: but their religious hatred of trans people existing You are slandering people who are feeling deep concern for the well-being of children and do grieve for their butchered bodies not being able to procreate and make a family unit. 2 hours ago, california boy said: I also believe that having a doctor, a neutral party in the decision process It is difficult to be neutral when the medical/industrial complex has made gender transitioning a billion dollar gravy train. It is unconscionable for many radical public school teachers to secretly groom impressionable children into taking on dangerous alternative lifestyles. Link to comment
Dario_M Posted October 10 Share Posted October 10 1 hour ago, longview said: You are slandering people who are feeling deep concern for the well-being of children and do grieve for their butchered bodies not being able to procreate and make a family unit. It is difficult to be neutral when the medical/industrial complex has made gender transitioning a billion dollar gravy train. It is unconscionable for many radical public school teachers to secretly groom impressionable children into taking on dangerous alternative lifestyles. This. Link to comment
Kenngo1969 Posted October 10 Share Posted October 10 8 hours ago, longview said: You are slandering people who are feeling deep concern for the well-being of children and do grieve for their butchered bodies not being able to procreate and make a family unit. It is difficult to be neutral when the medical/industrial complex has made gender transitioning a billion dollar gravy train. It is unconscionable for many radical public school teachers to secretly groom impressionable children into taking on dangerous alternative lifestyles. This. +1. Link to comment
SeekingUnderstanding Posted October 10 Share Posted October 10 9 hours ago, longview said: well-being of children So you completely support adults as they transition then? I had no idea. I’m sorry. Link to comment
longview Posted October 10 Share Posted October 10 1 hour ago, SeekingUnderstanding said: So you completely support adults as they transition then? I had no idea. I’m sorry. I do NOT support the butchering of children. But you knew that. Beware the derangement of wokism. 😢 Link to comment
bluebell Posted October 10 Share Posted October 10 7 minutes ago, longview said: I do NOT support the butchering of children. But you knew that. Beware the derangement of wokism. 😢 Is it the transitioning itself, or the age that happens, that is the problem in your eyes? 2 Link to comment
SeekingUnderstanding Posted October 10 Share Posted October 10 12 minutes ago, longview said: I do NOT support the butchering of children. But you knew that. Beware the derangement of wokism. 😢 Actually, I think your “care for children” is a thinly disguised veil for your religious disgust towards those made differently from you. But nice dodge of the question. 2 Link to comment
Dario_M Posted October 10 Share Posted October 10 (edited) I'm gonna be honest. But i'm argee with @longview I also find that this is not normal that this kind of matters get forced into the mind of a kid. Let alone that a surgery like that is negotiable with a CHILD. When i was a kid i didn't even know that i was gay, let alone that i was worried about myself or i really was a male or a female. Let a kid be a kid. Also...that i disapprove of this matter has nothing to do with the fact that i'm from the LDS community. My boyfiend has no religious background and he also finds this not normal. To me this smells like woke. Edited October 10 by Dario_M 1 Link to comment
longview Posted October 10 Share Posted October 10 22 minutes ago, bluebell said: Is it the transitioning itself, or the age that happens, that is the problem in your eyes? For the most part, both. If the person happens to be a faithful member of the Church, hopefully that person will strive to live the Gospel and being chaste and walk with God in all circumstances. Trusting that God will make things right in this life or the next world. In the end there will be incredible joy unimaginable. Link to comment
longview Posted October 10 Share Posted October 10 10 minutes ago, Dario_M said: To me this smells like woke. Thank you , Dario. Big upvote to you! The scary thing about woke is the hysteria and the herd mentality of rushing to try the latest social engineering fad. Link to comment
longview Posted October 10 Share Posted October 10 34 minutes ago, SeekingUnderstanding said: Actually, I think your “care for children” is a thinly disguised veil for your religious disgust towards those made differently from you. But nice dodge of the question. Oh no! You have passed judgement on me. What method of execution will be imposed? 😵 Link to comment
Popular Post smac97 Posted October 10 Author Popular Post Share Posted October 10 (edited) 48 minutes ago, bluebell said: Is it the transitioning itself, or the age that happens, that is the problem in your eyes? I have substantial moral, ethical and legal objections to these treatments as to minors. In no particular order: Comorbidities. Informed consent. Compromised assessments of the best interests of the child. Irreversibility. Sterilization. Cutting off healthy body parts. Longitudinal studies essentially absent. Lifelong medical regimens. Massive ideological/sociopolitical influences/pressures on medical care. Massive social contagion risks. Massive risk of financial devastation for the individual (and burden on society). I also have the more or less the same concerns (as opposed to objections) about these treatments as to adults. However, as fraught with perilous and detrimental factors as these procedures are, adults have substantially more autonomy to do to their bodies what they like. SeekingUnderstanding calls this "religious disgust" and "religious hatred." It is not. It is concern for my fellow man. Thanks, -Smac Edited October 10 by smac97 5 Link to comment
Rain Posted October 10 Share Posted October 10 (edited) 1 hour ago, longview said: Thank you , Dario. Big upvote to you! The scary thing about woke is the hysteria and the herd mentality of rushing to try the latest social engineering fad. @Dario - as you are wanting to better your English I wanted to share a little about the word "woke". I'm getting this from Wikipedia as it makes it easier to explain. It started out as being aware of racial prejudice and discrimination. Later it was also used for things like sexism and LGBT. Since then it has been used as a pejorative against 1 political party against another. So depending on who is using it then it can have very different conotations - one recognizing the struggles of people and the other other expressing contempt for someone or some line of thinking. Edited October 10 by Rain 3 Link to comment
SeekingUnderstanding Posted October 10 Share Posted October 10 20 minutes ago, smac97 said: SeekingUnderstanding calls this "religious disgust" and "religious hatred." It is not. It is concern for my fellow man. Thanks, -Smac Since your reading comprehension is exceedingly poor, I called a post that compared trans surgery to child sacrifice and labeling it as a "desolation of abominations" as religions hatred. And correctly identified the religious disgust behind it. I have no ideal if religious disgust drives *your ideology here. Link to comment
Dario_M Posted October 10 Share Posted October 10 25 minutes ago, longview said: Thank you , Dario. Big upvote to you! The scary thing about woke is the hysteria and the herd mentality of rushing to try the latest social engineering fad. Yeah i'm so agree with you. I actually find this whole new fashion a bit sick to be honest. And it's everywhere now. In the newest movies, in the newest games, just everywhere. And i don't like it at all. I don't watch new movies anymore. Because of the content. It's sad how this world has become. Sometimes it really make me cry. Because i can remember the good old days. The 90s the begin 2000s. Those where such beautiful times. Simple, happiness was self-evident. But now...you need to do this and that and a dangerous operation. And after that you maybe. Maybe can be happy. Link to comment
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now