Minister Orders Inquiry Into 4,000 % Rise In Children Wanting To Change Sex

[Kishkumen]

I don’t see circumcision as being similar to surgical transition.

One could call the former genital mutilation, while conservatives definitely call the latter such.

[Some Schmo]

One could call the former genital mutilation, while conservatives definitely call the latter such.

Oh, it's certainly genital mutilation, but humans are into mutilating their bodies. Piercing and tattoos are pretty popular too.

It's not my thing, but it is pretty common. Popular, even.

[Kishkumen]

Oh, it's certainly genital mutilation, but humans are into mutilating their bodies. Piercing and tattoos are pretty popular too.

It's not my thing, but it is pretty common. Popular, even.

I guess one of the questions worth considering is which acts of mutilation are truly voluntary.

[Res Ipsa]

Oh, it's certainly genital mutilation, but humans are into mutilating their bodies. Piercing and tattoos are pretty popular too.

It's not my thing, but it is pretty common. Popular, even.

I guess one of the questions worth considering is which acts of mutilation are truly voluntary.

First, mutilation is a definitionally and emotionally loaded term. It connotes some degree of harm to the individual. I would not, for example, describe a double mastectomy as part of cancer treatment as "mutlilation." If we're going to play the category game, I think that requires precise definition of the category "mutilation." I don't think this form of categorical reasoning is helpful at all.

[canpakes]

First, mutilation is a definitionally and emotionally loaded term. It connotes some degree of harm to the individual. I would not, for example, describe a double mastectomy as part of cancer treatment as "mutlilation."

Likewise, the same issue exists with augmentation or reduction for no specific medical reason.

[Kishkumen]

First, mutilation is a definitionally and emotionally loaded term. It connotes some degree of harm to the individual. I would not, for example, describe a double mastectomy as part of cancer treatment as "mutlilation." If we're going to play the category game, I think that requires precise definition of the category "mutilation." I don't think this form of categorical reasoning is helpful at all.

It is a loaded term. No question. And it is used in that way by people who have a beef with religious groups who engage in body modification as part of their practices. The question of how voluntary something is is still an important one.

[canpakes]

.
For Wallaby:

To qualify for gender affirmation at Boston Children's Hospital, you must be at least 18 years old for phalloplasty or metoidioplasty and for vaginoplasty.
You must also have the following:

- A letter from a medical doctor or nurse practitioner stating that you have "persistent, well documented, gender dysphoria" and specifying the length of hormone therapy.

- A letter from your regular therapist stating that you have "persistent, well documented, gender dysphoria," that any significant mental health concerns are well controlled and that you have been living full time in your identified gender for at least 12 months.

- A second letter, from a mental health professional familiar with the procedure you are seeking, stating you are ready for surgery. This should include your understanding of the surgery procedure and recovery needs, fertility implications of surgery, and risks of surgery. It should also state that you are able to consent for surgery and include an assessment of your support systems.

Patients who want to pursue chest surgery must be at least 15 years old and have the following:

- A letter from a medical doctor or nurse practitioner stating that you have "persistent, well documented, gender dysphoria" and specifying either the length of hormone therapy or why you are not taking hormone therapy.

- A letter from a mental health provider stating that you have the capacity to consent and that any significant mental health issues are being addressed.

https://www.childrenshospital.org/progr ... ty-surgery

[Res Ipsa]

First, mutilation is a definitionally and emotionally loaded term. It connotes some degree of harm to the individual. I would not, for example, describe a double mastectomy as part of cancer treatment as "mutlilation." If we're going to play the category game, I think that requires precise definition of the category "mutilation." I don't think this form of categorical reasoning is helpful at all.

It is a loaded term. No question. And it is used in that way by people who have a beef with religious groups who engage in body modification as part of their practices. The question of how voluntary something is is still an important one.

I don’t understand the relevance of what term other people use in some other context. If you and I are talking about the subject, why would use a term that we both agree is emotionally loaded?

I’m skeptical that the concept of “voluntarily” in and of itself will be that helpful. There is pretty good evidence that our brains are influenced by all kinds of things that we aren’t conscious of. Just as an example, is religious affiliation truly voluntary? If so, why is there a correlation between the religious affiliation between parent and child? Given the absence of any reliable way to determine whether any given act is truly voluntary, I suggest that the fundamental issue is who gets to decide?

One of my “leftist” law professors had a way of framing these types of issues that I generally use: Should we use the coercive power of the state to do X? And X should be described with specificity. As one of the core value of liberalism is personal autonomy, phrasing issues in this manner is a reminder that what we are really talking about is depriving an individual of personal liberty by imprisoning them, depriving them of their livelihood by taking away licenses, or taking their property. And that centers the discussion on the real world practical effect of what we are talking about.

If we use that formulation, I think a good starting place is when should we use the coercive power of the state to deprive a health care professional of their personal liberty or livelihood for performing a surgical procedure to which the patient and the patient’s parents or legal guardian have given informed consent and which does not violate the standard of care as determined by the medical profession?

[Kishkumen]

I don’t understand the relevance of what term other people use in some other context. If you and I are talking about the subject, why would use a term that we both agree is emotionally loaded?

We should be able to talk about a subject without getting unnecessarily feisty. It was the term that was being used when I entered the conversation. I thought it was interesting to pursue the issue with the use of the term as opposed to starting out by rejecting the term to see where that would go.

I’m skeptical that the concept of “voluntarily” in and of itself will be that helpful. There is pretty good evidence that our brains are influenced by all kinds of things that we aren’t conscious of. Just as an example, is religious affiliation truly voluntary? If so, why is there a correlation between the religious affiliation between parent and child? Given the absence of any reliable way to determine whether any given act is truly voluntary, I suggest that the fundamental issue is who gets to decide?

If nothing is voluntary, then why talk about freedom at all? I guess I don’t see your point. So kids can be brainwashed to think they should be another gender? I guess gender politics are now cultural brainwashing to get us to reject the Biblical model of Adam and Eve?

Er. . . .

One of my “leftist” law professors had a way of framing these types of issues that I generally use: Should we use the coercive power of the state to do X? And X should be described with specificity. As one of the core value of liberalism is personal autonomy, phrasing issues in this manner is a reminder that what we are really talking about is depriving an individual of personal liberty by imprisoning them, depriving them of their livelihood by taking away licenses, or taking their property. And that centers the discussion on the real world practical effect of what we are talking about.

So the coercive power of the state might interfere with a parent assisting a child in obtaining gender reassignment surgery? Should African Muslim have the right to remove the clitoris of a daughter in the family or not?

[DaveIsHere]

Y'all are getting really worked up about an article sourced from the Telegraph. Like I'm willing to bet less effort went into the JWST that you dudes are sinking into tearing down an unsourced piece of tabloid yellow journalism from a source that's broadly considered sus af. Ok, y'all do y'all....

It's just kinda weird, yo. Just saying.