banning puberty blockers for trans kids but allowing cis kids (who have been using them for like four decades without harm) on the start of pride is pretty absurd.
it also shows that it's not actually about protecting kids but about impose section 28.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but the only reason I know of for cis kids to use puberty blockers is as a measure against the condition precocious puberty, which basically means the body is going into puberty too soon.
If that's correct, then this isn't really a good argument, because using drugs to delay premature puberty until its 'normal time' is very different from delaying 'normal time' puberty to a future 'late time'--the latter moves the body into an abnormal state, while the former movies out out of one.
Isn't that kind of like arguing that because we've been using blood thinners successfully for a long time (leaving out that it's used primarily on people who are prone to blood clots to treat that condition), that there's definitely no harm in prescribing blood thinners to people with regular blood?
for cis kids they would take them to delay puberty until a time in the future at which point they come off the blockers and everything works fine, which defeats the main terf talking point of "irreversible changes" or being dangerous to children.
the only difference is that trans children would take them only until they can start taking hormones.
Unless someone is against trans people existing, is there any merit to doing this? Why make a person go through puberty twice just because they're "too young" to decide?
Trans people have been chosen as the current boogeyman of the UK for them to expiate for their own failings as a country, and for the consecutive disasters provoked by the Tories. It's a sleight of hand that allows them to distract the public with a fear without basis on reality in order to avoid taking responsibility of their own failures.
Because you cant just block puberty for a few years and expect it to jump start perfectly after that. Theres little to no long term studies on the effects of puberty blockers. Potentially, puberty blockers can cause sterilization and weaken your bones.
Minors cant get tattoo, why let them make this sort of decision?
You. Don't get therapy before getting a tattoo. You do get therapy and medical counceling before starting any sort of treatment like this. Your comparison is ridiculous.
Puberty also has significant consequences. The fact that your body is going to go through it without intervention doesn't change that there are consequences to consider.
Puberty blockers have been used for decades, mostly for non-trans patients. I'm sure the effects are fairly well understood, as far as any medical procedure can be understood.
My dad got a knee replaced not too long ago. He was told about the potential consequences and everything it may involve. He spoke with his doctor about what it'd entail many times. He made the decision to go ahead with it. He ended up regretting it and generally having more issues than it solved.
Does that mean people shouldn't be allowed to get knee replacement surgery? Of course not. You talk it through with your doctors (and parent/guardian in this case) and make an informed medical decision. The government shouldn't be making medical decisions for people, especially for things they don't fully understand themselves. People should be allowed to make their own medical decisions.
Edit: I think I've misread this comment chain, but putting my comment back now
These drugs have been used on cis children for non trans related conditions (such as precocious puberty in young children and some hormone-sensitive cancers in adults) for a long time and their effects are well known and fully reversible.
The use of puberty blockers in transgender youth is supported by twelve major medical associations, including the AMA. The people who take them are always, by established protocol, made aware of their major and side effects in relation to their own goals and self perceptions with regard to gender.
On the basis of the forgoing, trans healthcare is considered life saving by a vast consensus of medical professionals.
Now let's hear your side of this totally good faith discussion you've been talking about.
I mean there's having a discussion and then there's just dishonest refusal to even acknowledge an opposing view.
Lol what does "having a discussion" look like to you? Maybe asking questions like "Why...?", literally presenting an opportunity for someone to answer the question? Because maybe you need to re-read my initial comment.
You can't fathom a reason people might be concerned about children being given non-medicinal drugs that block puberty?
Puberty blockers are being offered in a medical context, generally after extensive work with the patient. These aren't hormones being bought over the dark web and taken (or administered) in secret.
There's also a difference between being "concerned" (which the Doctors ARE...hence why these aren't over-the-counter substances), and wanting it made illegal.
As you step off the train you are met with the void. As the last glimpse of the train disappears you realized you are doomed to wander the void forever.
(I honestly don't really know were this comment is going. It just sounded funny in my head.)
They generally refer to themselves as "gender-critical feminists".
The first part "trans-exclusionary" is pretty self-explanatory. "Radical" meaning they believe the whole system needs an overhaul, and mostly comes from the branch of feminism that TERFs/gender-criticals grew out of.
Not quite - they believe gender is a social construct, to the point that it literally doesn't exist, and the material reality of your biological sex is all there is. Historically, sociology followed biology, and sexual dimorphism is therefore the root of inequality between the sexes (particularly the fact that only females bear children). It's a compelling argument, particularly to a Marxist.
People can dress how they want though, none of my business.