# Louis Theroux & Transgender kids - WTF is wrong with people these days?



## Scrabbletray (Apr 27, 2014)

Blessed Frozen Cells said:


> Maybe educate yourself first about the science behind transgenderism before you discuss about it. Use facts. Not your own assumptions derived from lack of knowledge. You don't see me complaining about Higgs Boson particles cuz I have no idea what they are!


Feel free to "educate" us.


----------



## Blessed Frozen Cells (Apr 3, 2013)

a1b2c3d4 said:


> Feel free to "educate" us.


Why not just use google? Researches on this subject are not hard to find. Why would I waste my time on one's laziness? If it was something hard to find or not that well-known like asexuality, demi-, aromanticsm, agendered, etc. I would help with links and I had many times on here.

I've seen you reply to threads like this a lot. I'm not falling for your debate bait.


----------



## Scrabbletray (Apr 27, 2014)

Blessed Frozen Cells said:


> Why not just use google? Researches on this subject are not hard to find. Why would I waste my time on one's laziness?


OK, I did. According to the studies I found gender identity issues in childhood are more likely to result in an adult becoming a homosexual than then becoming a transgender. However, there was also a significant portion who grew up to be heterosexual and non-transgendered:

http://psycnet.apa.org/?&fa=main.doiLanding&doi=10.1037/0012-1649.44.1.34
http://www.jaacap.com/article/S0890-8567(08)60142-2/abstract



Blessed Frozen Cells said:


> If it was something hard to find or not that well-known like asexuality, demi-, aromanticsm, agendered, etc. I would help with links and I had many times on here.


These sort of things don't really exist insofar as they are just how normal people react and making them out to be different sexual orientations is just a result of "special snowflake disorder" and putting labels on things that are normal and don't need to be labeled.



Blessed Frozen Cells said:


> I've seen you reply to threads like this a lot. I'm not falling for your debate bait.


Oh, you mean I actually use evidence and logic and don't just axiomatically assert others are wrong without providing any proof? Yeah, I guess I can see how that would be frustrating for many here.


----------



## Blessed Frozen Cells (Apr 3, 2013)

a1b2c3d4 said:


> OK, I did. According to the studies I found gender identity issues in childhood are more likely to result in an adult becoming a homosexual than then becoming a transgender. However, there was also a significant portion who grew up to be heterosexual and non-transgendered:
> 
> http://psycnet.apa.org/?&fa=main.doiLanding&doi=10.1037/0012-1649.44.1.34
> http://www.jaacap.com/article/S0890-8567(08)60142-2/abstract
> ...


"don't fall for the bait! don't fall for the bait"


----------



## Scrabbletray (Apr 27, 2014)

Blessed Frozen Cells said:


> "don't fall for the bait! don't fall for the bait"


Awww, I'm only just baiting a little. It's mostly just that everyone here is going to insult the OP and then assert a point of view without the slightest proof it's true other than everyone (under the age of 30) believes it. *Jabberwocky* is the only one even trying here.


----------



## Slagasauras (Jun 26, 2013)

[Q UOTE=a1b2c3d4;16541938]Awww, I'm only just baiting a little. It's mostly just that everyone here is going to insult the OP and then assert a point of view without the slightest proof it's true other than everyone (under the age of 30) believes it. *Jabberwocky* is the only one even trying here.[/QUOTE]
he does unfortunately have a point.
I can cite my class notes from my developmental psychology class. Because I clearly know how the world works ;-).



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## aef8234 (Feb 18, 2012)

Jennywocky said:


> For the OP, a basic understanding:
> 
> Gender normative children normally have a very strong sense of gender identity at an early age.
> The development of gender differentiation in young children - Yee - 2011 - British Journal of Social Psychology - Wiley Online Library
> ...











Also, this might be a bait thread. But this is general psych, so it the OP COULD make a statement.
Ahwell, thanks for the study-thing, I was looking for something similar for a debate.

To the point of the OP though.
He/she is a fucking kid who wants to wear a fucking skirt. Why is that a problem?
Seriously? Just. How is a skirt wearing kid a problem?
I mean transgendered or not is irrelevant considering he/she's a kid, and the entire problem is a-
yaknow what imah just assume this is a bait thread, sit down, figure out how to subscribe to forums, and eat some dried mangos.


----------



## Blessed Frozen Cells (Apr 3, 2013)

a1b2c3d4 said:


> Awww, I'm only just baiting a little. It's mostly just that everyone here is going to insult the OP and then assert a point of view without the slightest proof it's true other than everyone (under the age of 30) believes it. *Jabberwocky* is the only one even trying here.


OP needs tough love


----------



## Wellsy (Oct 24, 2011)

I thought more people would've sniffed this out as purposely inflammatory.

Though it's not to odd for young children to gender bend, most tend to stop as they grow up, those who don't tend to do so as a more enduring quality of themselves.


----------



## tanstaafl28 (Sep 10, 2012)

@agwood

How would you know what age a person can know what gender identity they want to be? Why are you having such a harsh reaction to this? Maybe gender identity isn't exactly what you think it is. The kid appears happy to wear girl's clothing. The kid's parents are allowing him/her to explore his own identity, why shouldn't they? They are not wrong. They are raising their child as they see fit. It isn't your problem. Why are you making a fuss?


----------



## AmandaLee (Aug 13, 2014)

a1b2c3d4 said:


> *From any sort of logically consistent way of classifying mental illness things like homosexuality and certainly transgenderism should be considered mental illnesses.* Now, before everyone gets their panties into a wad(hey, that's sexist!) I am saying that not because there is anything "wrong" with being either of these things but because our definitions of "mental illness" include dozens of other things that are just as much normal variations in the human species. There is no logical reason why we consider one difference to be worthy of defending while considering another to be worthy of scorn.


I just wanted to add my two-cents to this. What counts as a mental illness and what doesn't is actually not completely arbitrary, even though I'm the first one to admit that the diagnostic criteria are not completely free from political influence. 

In order for something to be a mental illness, it must impact the individual's functioning levels from a clinical POV. Homosexuality in itself does not do this and thus it does not count as a mental illness. Disorders like schizophrenia, bipolar disorder, personality disorders and anxiety disorders, while they're certainly "natural", all cause the person suffering from them to experience a varying loss of functioning and difficulty with interpersonal relationships. Gender identity disorders are more difficult to categorize, because the body dysphoria experienced by these people typically leads to decreased functioning levels in some form.


----------



## Scrabbletray (Apr 27, 2014)

AmandaLee said:


> In order for something to be a mental illness, it must impact the individual's functioning levels from a clinical POV.


Oh yes, I'm fully aware of the current definition, but it's 100% subjective. Thete are some obvious diseases, but for the most part it's simply based on how far you are from the average human. If you are more emotionally unstable than normal then you are borderline or bipolar. If you have a lower attention span than normal then you have ADD. If you are more prone to fear then you have anxiety etc. Now imagine you take a completely "normal" person and take them to a planet with a slightly more evolved race of humans. Normal people aren't perfectly emotionally stable, so by these space humans' standards we are all borderline. By the same token we also all have ADD and anxiety. And let's make no mistakes, even the normal human's ability to function is VASTLY impaired by even our normal level of flaws. Most humans don't even come close to meeting their potential. Imagine how much better off you would be with a little longer attention span, a little more stable emotions and a few less irrational fears. That's largely looking at how a person functions assuming capitalistic goals like getting a good job. Homosexuality and transgenderism might not matter as much there. But when looking at other goals like our evolutionary goal of passing on our DNA it's clearly a major flaw. Anyway, I'm drifting off to sleep so let me get back to you on that one.


----------



## AmandaLee (Aug 13, 2014)

a1b2c3d4 said:


> Oh yes, I'm fully aware of the current definition, but it's 100% subjective. Thete are some obvious diseases, but for the most part it's simply based on how far you are from the average human. If you are more emotionally unstable than normal then you are borderline or bipolar. If you have a lower attention span than normal then you have ADD. If you are more prone to fear then you have anxiety etc. Now imagine you take a completely "normal" person and take them to a planet with a slightly more evolved race of humans. Normal people aren't perfectly emotionally stable, so by these space humans' standards we are all borderline. By the same token we also all have ADD and anxiety. And let's make no mistakes, even the normal human's ability to function is VASTLY impaired by even our normal level of flaws. Most humans don't even come close to meeting their potential. Imagine how much better off you would be with a little longer attention span, a little more stable emotions and a few less irrational fears. That's largely looking at how a person functions assuming capitalistic goals like getting a good job. Homosexuality and transgenderism might not matter as much there. But when looking at other goals like our evolutionary goal of passing on our DNA it's clearly a major flaw. Anyway, I'm drifting off to sleep so let me get back to you on that one.


I think it's important to remember that the traits you listed all exist on a continuum. In moderation these traits can actually enhance performance and only become pathological in abundance. We know there is a strong genetic component in many serious mental disorders, including but not limited to schizophrenia, bipolar disorder, and autism. If these traits were really exclusively flaws in the evolutionary process, wouldn't they have been eliminated from our gene pool millennia ago? Asperger's and HFA is associated with heightened systemizing skills, bipolar disorder with creativity, schizophrenia with heightened/unusual sensing and risk awareness and ADHD/ADD with excess energy and the ability to put in an extra gear. There's a theory that even unipolar depression may have a genetic precursor that was useful in prehistoric times since it allowed the individual to "hibernate" and conserve energy during meager times. 

There are similar theories regarding the role of homosexuality and why it has endured into modern times. The human social dynamic is one possible explanation.


----------



## Popinjay (Sep 19, 2011)

If he had grown up in the Republic, we would have discovered him at a very young age.


----------



## Scrabbletray (Apr 27, 2014)

AmandaLee said:


> There are similar theories regarding the role of homosexuality and why it has endured into modern times. The human social dynamic is one possible explanation.


Is there any genetic genetic basis for homosexuality though? Don't most gay people have straight parents and most gay parents have straight kids?


----------



## Jennywocky (Aug 7, 2009)

a1b2c3d4 said:


> From any sort of logically consistent way of classifying mental illness things like homosexuality and certainly transgenderism should be considered mental illnesses. Now, before everyone gets their panties into a wad(hey, that's sexist!) I am saying that not because there is anything "wrong" with being either of these things but because our definitions of "mental illness" include dozens of other things that are just as much normal variations in the human species. There is no logical reason why we consider one difference to be worthy of defending while considering another to be worthy of scorn. Depending on where you live there are probably laws protecting 5-10 different "protected classes" and I would argue that by any rational point of view that number should be more like 25. Why is "gender identity" a protected class that people defend so vigorously but dozens of other far more common and more "normal" variations among humans are considered "diseases"? I hate our whole system and the MASSIVE hypocrisy it breeds in threads like this. The same people who come here and smugly defend gender identity will go into another thread and show no empathy at all to people with other differences, nor will society in general. People will demand blood from those who think a little differently or have certain problems, but then demand their own differences be respected and their own problems forgiven. I wish I understood why people drew lines in one place and not others. At least with Christians I can UNDERSTAND where their rational come from because they have a crazy book telling them what to do, but with "progressives" it seems like they take that same book and then just add 2-3 more classes (gender identity and sexual preference), but don't go deeper and understand WHY they just add those two and not the 100 other things in the DSM V.


Mental illnesses are issues that prevent someone from being able to function in life and/or building substantial relationships with others. Homosexuality and gender dysphoria are issues primarily because of negative social acceptance, which then creates a number of emotional issues that make it difficult to cope with life. This is why there have been shifts in the DSM. Once gay people were able to actually build long-term commitments, have families, and not be treated with moral disdain, they haven't shown any difference from heterosexuals in terms of functioning. Same thing with true gender dysphorics who are treated medically, and it's not even difficult to prove -- just look at the countless gay and trans people who hold successful jobs, hold down marriages, raise kids, etc. and successfully function as long as society isn't treating them like second-class citizens. 

This is not the same at all of actual psychological conditions that preclude natural functioning if left to their own devices.



> Both these studies were 5+ years of age and therefore are only slightly related to the topic at hand which is a five year old.


"only slightly related"? I doubt that the normal gender self-concept of western children is going to change that drastically in the last twenty years or so, and of course the second study is going to be very much related.



> More importantly as someone with a good background in statistics I can tell you that a study with 50 people is basically worth poop (especially since VERY few will have been five like this topic is about) and a study with 128 isn't exactly very strong either. People shouldn't even be allowed to perform studies with that few participants because they simply don't carry statistical significance unless the variable being tested correlates very strongly. IMO it's not scientifically honest to perform studies with such a low sample size, but that's a question for another day I guess.


When you can identify and get permission to study 1000 gender dysphoric children, let me know. But at the very least I doubt you could say you've actually observed a gender dysphoric child growing up. I have. 



> The bigger point is that the ability of a child to understand their own gender means a very different thing at five than it does at 18. A five year old may indicate their gender based on a color (they were TOLD indicates their gender) or an activity (like playing soccer vs having tea parties), but those mean so little at that age. I guarantee you the vast majority of the things that a five year old considers as defining their gender will be completely different by the time they are an adult.


Do you really even have a grasp of how a child identifies their own gender? You sound like you're just making up your idea of how you think a child must be identifying their gender and then why it's not legitimate. (AKA strawman) 



> I don't understand why anyone would want to try to pigeonhole their kid as transgendered at the age of five.


They don't. Parents are naturally resistant and/or unaccepting of gender-variant children and their behavior. There's very few parents that are excited that their child is continuously expressing a sense of themselves as the opposite gender and composing themselves / imprinting like their opposite-gendered peers. Usually it's after a period of parents not being able to change an ounce of their child's self-identity or gender expression for a few years, with the child's functioning becoming worse and worse, perhaps even stretching into self-harm, that they finally start seeking psychiatric counsel for a child. 

And then, depending on diagnosis, they have some very difficult decisions to make. They want to do what is best for their kid, not making a mistake. They don't want their child to be seen as "weird" or physically in danger from their peers. They don't want to be seen as bad parents by the rest of society. Etc. (Just as some people here are making them out to be. It's all pretty telling.)

you can rest assured that if any normal parent is affirming of a gender-dysphoric child's identity, it's because they've decided that in the end it's still the best course for their child, they've seen that it has greatly improved their child's functioning, and they are passionately willing to accept criticism and scorn from society in the best interests of their child as they have grown to perceive it.

But I'm pretty sure I've had this same conversation with you before in the past.

... anyway, the studies you quote seem pretty small as well, but you seem happy with using them as statistics.

A number of gender variant kids go through a lull period before puberty and then will come out as homosexual. A portion will remain gender dysphoric. Current treatments prescribe making no permanent changes to a child's medical state until adulthood; puberty blockers are temporary, meant to extend the length of the teen's period where they can consider their options and what they really want. 

It's interesting that what people seem to be offended by is the thought of a girl identifying as a boy / exploring life as a boy and/or the opposite -- gendered behavior. If a boy identifies as a girl until age 8, then decides he's a boy and spends the rest of his life identifying as male... why should it matter? And vice versa? We certainly have enough of parents forcing their boys to be hypermasculinized regardless of their own identities and girls into being hyperfeminized, yet that is considered acceptable by society even if it's more a transgression of the individual child in question. Here we have children who seem to strongly identify as the opposite gender and the parents are trying to respect that, and that's viewed as far more a travesty.


----------



## Scrabbletray (Apr 27, 2014)

Jennywocky said:


> Mental illnesses are issues that prevent someone from being able to function in life and/or building substantial relationships with others. Homosexuality and gender dysphoria are issues primarily because of negative social acceptance, which then creates a number of emotional issues that make it difficult to cope with life.


That is likely largely true with homosexuality, but I find it hard to believe it's also exclusively true for transgenderism as well. For instance, erectile dysfunction is a disease that makes it hard for a many to function as a man and can lead to problems like depression and performance anxiety. I would have to assume that for a transgender male (who didn't even HAVE a penis) these problems would only me magnified. Their transgenderism is directly affecting their ability to have normal human romantic relationships which will invariably lead to other mental health issues.



Jennywocky said:


> Just look at the countless gay and trans people who hold successful jobs, hold down marriages, raise kids, etc. and successfully function as long as society isn't treating them like second-class citizens.


Just look at all the depressed, anxious and bipolar people successful functioning in society...



Jennywocky said:


> This is not the same at all of actual psychological conditions that preclude natural functioning if left to their own devices.


Since when have any psychological conditions other than the very work ones precluded natural functioning? They are all hurdles which have to be dealt with just like transgenderism is. Even homosexuality isn't immune from this because it cuts off 90% of possible romantic partners which obviously makes life harder than it otherwise would be. Gay people have to search each other out more whereas straight people can just meet someone at school or at work and assume they are the same sexual orientation.



Jennywocky said:


> "only slightly related"? I doubt that the normal gender self-concept of western children is going to change that drastically in the last twenty years or so, and of course the second study is going to be very much related.


I meant the KIDS were 5+ years old (5-12) so the average age was 8-9 which is a different point in development from the age of five. 



Jennywocky said:


> When you can identify and get permission to study 1000 gender dysphoric children, let me know. But at the very least I doubt you could say you've actually observed a gender dysphoric child growing up. I have.


Until you do have a broad study like that you shouldn't be making such strong conclusions about the issue. Your one individual observation of a gender dysphoric kid isn't strong evidence to how ALL gender dysphoric kids act and you should know that. What about the studies I found showing that the majority of gender dysphoric children DON'T grow up to be transgendered?



Jennywocky said:


> Do you really even have a grasp of how a child identifies their own gender? You sound like you're just making up your idea of how you think a child must be identifying their gender and then why it's not legitimate. (AKA strawman)


You don't sound like you are positing an idea at all so I'm not sure how you expect me to assume I'm wrong just because you said the word "strawman" and do anything to show why that is the case.



Jennywocky said:


> you can rest assured that if any normal parent is affirming of a gender-dysphoric child's identity, it's because they've decided that in the end it's still the best course for their child, they've seen that it has greatly improved their child's functioning, and they are passionately willing to accept criticism and scorn from society in the best interests of their child as they have grown to perceive it.


I'm not sure why you would just assume that if a parent is acting this way they must have the best of intentions at heart. And even if they DO have purely good intentions, so do parents who think they can, "pray the gay away" or send their kid to conversion therapy. You need some sort of evidence that dressing a five year old up in the opposite gender clothes will actually help them more than it will hurt them and I've not seen any evidence to that affect in this thread. You showed that young children have a sense of gender, but not that this sense of gender is stable for the rest of their life. All the transgender rights websites I went to talked about people developing into their transgender identity in a wide range of ages (say 5-15), so clearly gender identity CAN change in this age range. What's to say it can't change for a while and then change back? Like the study I quoted showed, many of these kids may simply be homosexual and not understand the difference between homosexual and transgendered (AT FIVE YEARS OLD).

This stuff isn't exactly straightforward for a kid or even a hormone raging teen you know.











Jennywocky said:


> ... anyway, the studies you quote seem pretty small as well, but you seem happy with using them as statistics.


Yes, those studies suck too. They were just the first two that came up when I searched for studies of how gender dysphoric kids developed into adulthood. It worked out well since someone was saying no such studies existed and the top studies from Google went against their point of view. :tongue: I didn't post them to say I assume they are true, only to show that studies clearly exist showing that.



Jennywocky said:


> A number of gender variant kids go through a lull period before puberty and then will come out as homosexual. A portion will remain gender dysphoric. Current treatments prescribe making no permanent changes to a child's medical state until adulthood; puberty blockers are temporary, meant to extend the length of the teen's period where they can consider their options and what they really want.


I would have to assume puberty blocks have at least some permanent side-effects and certainly some temporary ones. There is definitely a cost to getting this wrong.



Jennywocky said:


> It's interesting that what people seem to be offended by is the thought of a girl identifying as a boy / exploring life as a boy and/or the opposite -- gendered behavior.


Eh, not as much as you would think. We just used to call them "tom boys" and not "transgendered boys".



Jennywocky said:


> If a boy identifies as a girl until age 8, then decides he's a boy and spends the rest of his life identifying as male... why should it matter? And vice versa? We certainly have enough of parents forcing their boys to be hypermasculinized regardless of their own identities and girls into being hyperfeminized, yet that is considered acceptable by society even if it's more a transgression of the individual child in question. Here we have children who seem to strongly identify as the opposite gender and the parents are trying to respect that, and that's viewed as far more a travesty.


This is more of an over-arching societal issue and not just a transgendered issue. There isn't really a defense for the way society acts, but you still have to live within that society and that affects your decisions too.


----------



## Lord Bullingdon (Aug 9, 2014)

And when I was 5, I stuck a baby blanket out the back of my pants and declared I was an animal, and it was my "tail". Talk about confusion, I didn't even get the right species. I swear, I grew into a semi-sane adult with no lasting damage.

And more in line with the OP, I knew a boy who enjoyed playing dress-up (in sparkly dresses and heels) and doing hair-styles at the age of 7. He grew out of it, and as near as I can tell, grew into a fully-functional adult without any gender issues. 

It's possible the boy in the OP is similar to both of us. 

I agree, it's a bit early to determine if he's transgender, or if this is just a phase. But there's nothing wrong with this behavior. I'd worry more about how his peers would react to him and other issues he might have at school if it becomes regular. I'd also worry more about the consequences of tearing him from his parents and putting him into foster care, as the OP suggests.


----------



## Sangmu (Feb 18, 2014)

Note: I am open to new information but this it my opinion to date.

During these debates, I usually see two incompatible ideologies being rolled into one.

1. Gender is a social construct.

2. Gender is not a social construct because the brain of transgender person is male or female but in the the wrong body.

3. Gender is a social construct so how you dare you enforce gender roles on a child who has a male brain but a female body. Wait, whuuuuuut?

So confusing. 

I cannot help but feel that medical doctors who participate in this movement are violating their Hippocratic Oath. I've known several trans people and each one had deep seated prejudice against their "assigned gender" which caused them to want to be the other gender. This can happen at a young age. I remember being highly sensitive to and aware of both misogynistic and misandrist views I had heard under age five.

Want to hear some really misogynist views sometime? Ask a female-to-male transgender person why they felt they weren't a woman. Preferable ask them while they're drunk and don't have a carefully constructed PC censor on. "_I'm not like women. I'm not petty, chatty, and emotional. I like mechanical things. Philosophy and history. Plus I like having short hair and well-made clothing._"

Oh, yes. Your deeply internalized misogynist beliefs certainly call for extreme surgery and hormonal therapy.


----------



## Psychophant (Nov 29, 2013)

a1b2c3d4 said:


> From any sort of logically consistent way of classifying mental illness things like homosexuality and certainly transgenderism should be considered mental illnesses. Now, before everyone gets their panties into a wad(hey, that's sexist!) I am saying that not because there is anything "wrong" with being either of these things but because our definitions of "mental illness" include dozens of other things that are just as much normal variations in the human species. There is no logical reason why we consider one difference to be worthy of defending while considering another to be worthy of scorn. Depending on where you live there are probably laws protecting 5-10 different "protected classes" and I would argue that by any rational point of view that number should be more like 25. Why is "gender identity" a protected class that people defend so vigorously but dozens of other far more common and more "normal" variations among humans are considered "diseases"? I hate our whole system and the MASSIVE hypocrisy it breeds in threads like this. The same people who come here and smugly defend gender identity will go into another thread and show no empathy at all to people with other differences, nor will society in general. People will demand blood from those who think a little differently or have certain problems, but then demand their own differences be respected and their own problems forgiven. I wish I understood why people drew lines in one place and not others. At least with Christians I can UNDERSTAND where their rational come from because they have a crazy book telling them what to do, but with "progressives" it seems like they take that same book and then just add 2-3 more classes (gender identity and sexual preference), but don't go deeper and understand WHY they just add those two and not the 100 other things in the DSM V.


I agree with a few sentences in there, but not the first part. Mental illnesses are somewhat arbitrary diagnostic terms for when a person reaches a certain point on some continuum, yes, but the criterion you're missing here is that whatever tendency is being displayed in unusual amounts has to be damaging enough to that person's ability to function that it badly interferes with his/her daily life (and yeah, it's not uncommon for "badly interferes" to be quantified). People with exceptionally high intelligence are far more rare than people with depression, but we don't call high intelligence a mental illness because (generally) it doesn't hinder your ability to be a healthy individual. So for the same reason, I don't see why we'd call transgender a mental illness. Some of the dysphoria caused by it, sure, but not just identifying with a different gender.


----------

