As a person who works in a social services nonprofit in SF that is fairly trans-friendly, I know a number of fully transitioned adults who are healthy and happy (or as happy as any human in these divisive times can be). Their suicidal, self-loathing teen years are long behind them; most are partnered up and some have kids. They transitioned after years of therapy. The effectiveness of drugs & surgery has made some of them genuinely appear to be the opposite gender of their biological sex. I consider these success stories. Walsh would prefer that they not exist as they do today.
Good to know about Walsh's perspective, thanks Mark. Unfortunately, those of us on the gender critical left who don't share that view rarely get our voices heard. Libertarian-leaning conservatives would not share Walsh's perspective either.
I politely disagree on a point of fact and note your sophistry. You’re employing the same hyperbolic fallacy so loved by trans activists. Walsh doesn’t wish the adults you describe dead - those who have had years of therapy and apparently went through their teens without getting amputations. He wants informed consent along with an age of majority rule, the same as your friends experienced as adults. He wants safeguards put into mental health system to surgery pipeline free of ideological undue influence and bully tactics.
Gender dysphoria is a diagnosis. “Give me what I want or I’ll kill myself” is a symptom of many pathologies, including drug addiction. Why on earth is immediate capitulation to an illness the recommended treatment? We could save a fortune in Narcan and drug treatment programs with that line of thinking.
LOL you are attempting to disagree with a person who actually shares your perspective on informed consent, is against immediate capitulation by both parents & medical establishments, and who also sees "Give me what I want or I'll kill myself" as a symptom of a pathology.
I actually did not say he wants trans folks dead; it is sophistry on your part to put words in my mouth. Try not to do that in the future, it is an ineffective tactic. Although certainly a popular one, at least on Twitter.
I wrote that he "would prefer that they not exist as they do today" which does not have the same meaning as DEAD. I personally don't believe that Walsh wants them dead either.
My comment is not hyperbole because, if you followed the links, you'd see that Walsh wants surgical options to be illegal FOR ALL AGES, not just children. Please read his words for yourself, they are pretty straightforward. If Walsh called the shots, my friends & colleagues would not - as I specifically wrote - "exist as they do today." They would not be the same people physically because they would have been unable to have surgery. They would be in the same bodies that caused them so much suffering earlier in their lives... "not exist as they do today" does not equal "dead".
The next time you consider posting a rebuttal, I advise that you read the post you are attempting to bash a bit more closely. Also, perhaps follow links that include a person's exact words. And finally, accusing someone of "sophistry" is not polite disagreement, it is a deep insult and therefore an attack.
It may not be clear in the film (it wasn't to me either), but Walsh has actually said that these procedures should be illegal for all ages.
https://twitter.com/MattWalshBlog/status/1533611776763371520
https://twitter.com/MattWalshBlog/status/1533612406525546497
As a person who works in a social services nonprofit in SF that is fairly trans-friendly, I know a number of fully transitioned adults who are healthy and happy (or as happy as any human in these divisive times can be). Their suicidal, self-loathing teen years are long behind them; most are partnered up and some have kids. They transitioned after years of therapy. The effectiveness of drugs & surgery has made some of them genuinely appear to be the opposite gender of their biological sex. I consider these success stories. Walsh would prefer that they not exist as they do today.
Good to know about Walsh's perspective, thanks Mark. Unfortunately, those of us on the gender critical left who don't share that view rarely get our voices heard. Libertarian-leaning conservatives would not share Walsh's perspective either.
I politely disagree on a point of fact and note your sophistry. You’re employing the same hyperbolic fallacy so loved by trans activists. Walsh doesn’t wish the adults you describe dead - those who have had years of therapy and apparently went through their teens without getting amputations. He wants informed consent along with an age of majority rule, the same as your friends experienced as adults. He wants safeguards put into mental health system to surgery pipeline free of ideological undue influence and bully tactics.
Gender dysphoria is a diagnosis. “Give me what I want or I’ll kill myself” is a symptom of many pathologies, including drug addiction. Why on earth is immediate capitulation to an illness the recommended treatment? We could save a fortune in Narcan and drug treatment programs with that line of thinking.
LOL you are attempting to disagree with a person who actually shares your perspective on informed consent, is against immediate capitulation by both parents & medical establishments, and who also sees "Give me what I want or I'll kill myself" as a symptom of a pathology.
I actually did not say he wants trans folks dead; it is sophistry on your part to put words in my mouth. Try not to do that in the future, it is an ineffective tactic. Although certainly a popular one, at least on Twitter.
I wrote that he "would prefer that they not exist as they do today" which does not have the same meaning as DEAD. I personally don't believe that Walsh wants them dead either.
My comment is not hyperbole because, if you followed the links, you'd see that Walsh wants surgical options to be illegal FOR ALL AGES, not just children. Please read his words for yourself, they are pretty straightforward. If Walsh called the shots, my friends & colleagues would not - as I specifically wrote - "exist as they do today." They would not be the same people physically because they would have been unable to have surgery. They would be in the same bodies that caused them so much suffering earlier in their lives... "not exist as they do today" does not equal "dead".
The next time you consider posting a rebuttal, I advise that you read the post you are attempting to bash a bit more closely. Also, perhaps follow links that include a person's exact words. And finally, accusing someone of "sophistry" is not polite disagreement, it is a deep insult and therefore an attack.
https://dictionary.cambridge.org/us/dictionary/english/sophistry
Cheers!
Such a scold...your blandishments about my behavior are disregarded in light of the fact that you edited your post so you could make this point.