Forum menu
Thankyou jon, I also hope this could be informative. I feel like I'm walking into a minefield here so I'd like to make clear I have great sympathy for you and your son, the last thing I would want is to make light of your situation, say something hurtful or come across like I know better than you about what is best for your son.
I believe in UK law a child is under 18.
Both you and your son are clearly sure this is the best path forward for him so perhaps starting on puberty blockers early could have really helped.
I think this is where we get into a grey area about what a child can consent to, can a child fully understands the long term implications of medical intervention at a young age?
To give an example I have a friend who's son had a really difficult time in his teens. He was absolutely adamant for a long time that he was trans. When he got to 17/18 he just kind of grew out of it and is now a happy gay man. These are the children I worry about, he could easily have gone down a different path that would have potentially effected him for life.
So to pick up on your train of thought from the previous page, you think that the best way to navigate this grey area is to avoid teaching children about DEI and trans issues? I can see why you have trouble finding a political home, as said earlier in the thread though, sounds like you'd be perfectly at home with Reform.
I believe in UK law a child is under 18
That's a cop out answer. I asked you - Define Children?
Does your answer mean you're against any sort of medical intervention including PB's and hormones for someone under 18, because then you say say that you're sure that we're making the best decisions for him. Which meant finally getting PB's at about 15 to stop further development and stopping monthly bleeding, etc. You think we should be lawfully stopped from doing that, or not?
Tom - Depends what we mean by DEI and trans issues.
If for DEI it means that everyone should have the same opportunities regardless of whether they're black, white, brown, man, woman, rich, poor or whatever else, that's completely fine by me and should be encouraged. If it means filling roles and positions based on any of that to fill some kind of diversity quota then definitely not.
For trans again it depends. If we're teaching them that gender dysphoria is a thing and that trans people deserve compassion and understanding, no problem. If we're teaching them that men can in fact become women and vice versa then no.
jon - yes it was a cop out answer. I was undecided between 16 and 18 so went with that. On further thought you can legally have sex at 16 and drive at 17, both of which have potential life altering consequences, I'll go with no medical intervention under the age of 16.
That being said if it was proven that puberty blockers could be taken for a couple of years and then stopped with no negative repercussions then I'd be open to changing my mind. I don't see how this could be but you probably know vastly more about them than I do.
So, as I see it, you want to go back to a time before DEI was quite so prevalent, when privileged white men had all the advantages/power/money. Cool.
You also don’t want people to have a say what happens to their own bodies until it’s too late. Cool.
And all that seeming comes before the economy, education, housing, defence, foreign policy/the EU etc.
There’s a couple of parties that will happily take your support/donations I think, none of them will get anywhere near Westminster, but you’ll be helping keep the top brass in a coutts account.
So you support NHS and some form of welfare state but are socially a good fit for reform/ukip/Brexit.....I suppose that you're just mainly on the right of the Tory party then. Doesn't seem like you're a nomad at all. You seem to be having the same sort of turmoil as lot a lot of the Tory party. Hopefully that way of thinking is going to be enjoying a record defeat this year 👍
Perhaps I'm expressing myself poorly tom. I want to live in a time where the only consideration is competence. I don't care if that's a privileged white man, disadvantaged black woman or anything else. Merit should be the only metric.
I'm totally ok with adults doing whatever they so wish with their own bodies. My point was I'm not sure a child can fully understand and consent to medical interventions that could have life long consequences.
I'm a little baffled how this is considered controversial.
Ok, point 1 is that in a lot of cases - not all, granted - lack of intervention can lead to outcomes with long term consequences. Some are potentially reversible, some may not be. Mental health in the TG community is a major issue and take it from me, " you're a child, you can't possibly understand how you feel and what you want" being one of them - your childhood years should be the best of your life and the trauma can be life lasting. That's before self harm and suicide, both of which are ever present thoughts to my wife and I - sometimes higher, sometimes lower, but always there.
2/ in many areas we allow parents, guardians, healthcare representatives to make best decisions where we deem a child unable to. Gillick competencies, etc. in lower age groups the child may have strong views that are listened to but do not have final agency. Your opening position on this removes agency on the basis of a date on a birth certificate, as does aligning to a party that believes in this, or is likely to harden to this.
3/ much of what is currently permitted by regs, guidelines and so on is in reality not because the services set up that should support (and yes, right or wrong 'gatekeep') have been so chronically underfunded by this party and nearly 14 years of mismanagement. I'm lucky; it's cost thousands and will cost thousands more for the private equivalent but at least we can do it with sacrifices elsewhere. We've not had a holiday for 5 years, my cars 100k mile's, my bike's from 2011. We had no choice....yet some on here and elsewhere call me a child abuser, of mutilating my child's body. You might stop short of that but a vote for what would come with another 5 years of this Government emboldened might not put you in the same room as them but you're in the same house
Think hard with your nomadic agency. And please do some reading because right now I'm minded of my Dad's saying - "opinions are like arseholes.... everyone has one but some are covered in shit"
Rightist – I’m strongly against mass immigration, DEI, trans stuff in relation to children.
I’m a little baffled how this is considered controversial.
Really?! Jon probably puts these much things more eloquently than me, and really deserves a medal for the empathy he shows in his posts given the current toxicity that some people seem to revel in.
I'm also of the view that a) I can always be better informed b) I am comfortable being challenged in my views by considering other views and c) I will never find a political party I wholly agree with - but make my decision on balance and on direction of travel.
If we’re teaching them that men can in fact become women and vice versa then no.
That's where you're going wrong. The kids are perfectly capable of figuring this stuff out for themselves and don't need any 'teaching' from us. In fact it's not them that need teaching it's us!
Thankyou jon for taking the time to explain a little about your perspective on such a personal and difficult subject.
For what it's worth I've listened to a good few interviews from both people who've transitioned and detransitioned so I'm not completely ignorant, just mostly! It's pretty harrowing stuff all round.
If there's any reading you would recommend I'd be interested to do so.
Unless you want to keep going perhaps we should leave it there for now. I'm well aware how easily topics like these go off the rails and I rather not be the cause.
I want to live in a time where the only consideration is competence.
The problem is that the judgement of "competence" is all too often biased towards white middle-class men such as myself. This is hardly controversial and anyone with a passing interest in the topic is well aware of the issue which suggests you're playing the role of a boring troll.
I want to live in a time where the only consideration is competence.
That assumes all things leading to someone becoming competent, then put themselves forward for consideration, are equal.
For example, there might be loads of refugee women that are brilliant nurses or care workers, but you want to stop mass immigration.
which suggests you’re playing the role of a boring troll.
I don't see a Troll. I see someone who expressed some views I don't agree with and which go against the grain on here, but who (it seems to me) is genuinely trying to understand a different perspective from his own.
A good thing no?
As soon as the name calling starts, any chance someone might listen and even reevaluate their views is dead in the water.
Kudos to @theotherjonv for their tolerance and for doing an incredible job of articulating some of the issues around this subject.
I usually vote Lib Dem, but they have no chance in my constituency. I have also voted, Labour, Green, even Conservative (once, to keep loony Jeremy Corbyn out).
I am a digital subscriber to the Economist, and their analysis of Kier Starmer's recovery policy means that I will be voting Labour in the next GE.
@blokeuptheroad: I totally agree with your point, I occasionally leave this forum because of the "I think differently to you and you are a monster" attitude of some members.
because of the “I think differently to you and you are a monster” attitude of some members.
You have just called Jeremy Corbyn a "loony", presumably because you don't agree with his politics rather than because you think he has mental health issues.
I am not sure what that says about people on here who voted Labour at the last general election.
I agree with the sentiment behind your comment though - it would be nice if people showed a little more respect towards those with a different political position to theirs 👍
I am a digital subscriber to the Economist, and their analysis of Kier Starmer’s recovery policy means that I will be voting Labour in the next GE
Is that being shared with the rest of the voters any time soon?
I occasionally leave this forum because of the “I think differently to you and you are a monster” attitude of some members.
On some stuff my views are so formed (and maybe even entrenched) and the alternate opinions just so simply incorrect that while I'll still try to convince them civilly, in the end I can't escape that if they stick to their position then I just can't bring myself to be that tolerant.
We faced it with some friends and family and I would absolutely drop them if they held the views that Billabong initially proposed. Denying adolescents - not just adolescents; pre-adolescents as they are the ones where the benefit is most - access to PB's for example.
With billabong; are they a troll? I have like many wearied of new members with 'alternative' views, suspicious in some cases that they are just returning trolls. I'm not 100% sure here, but the name is an easy one to remember so when 'alternate' views keep cropping up and the name is notable......I'm obviously sensitive to TG issues so when they were against the Dr Who episode a temporary label was applied, since when they haven't substantially done much to change my view.
a look at threads they have started since joining in Aug last year
- libtards vs gammons
- this one
- one on shocks that could have been easily written with little actual knowledge and then no further participation in the debate
and in replies to other threads, among some fairly normal stuff (building a cover story?)
- if I was american I'd have voted for Trump both times
- knives; I carry a lock knife; I’m fully aware it’s illegal but I don’t care, when it breaks or I lose it I'm buying another.
- covid enquiry; quickly threw support behind obvious troll alex22
- and a very 'alternative position' about immigration, etc., on the far right thread
Troll, edgelord, or just someone whose views are too diametrically opposed to the ones I hold dear.... in the end does it really make a huge difference.
And the reasonable 'thanks for taking the time to explain' - still not sure if it washes.
I have a great many flaws. I'm stubborn, argumentative, contrary and opinionated to name just a few. One thing I'm not is a troll. If I wanted to troll STW I'd start a thread about e bikes, the best way to make avocado on toast or how to fit more log burners in my house.
and jon, you can say or think what you like about me but I assure you that my thanks to you for being so open and honest about such a personal topic are sincere. If I was in your shoes I doubt I would do that.
It's not "contrary" to parrot talking points of RW conspiracy theorist loons. It's just tedious.
If I wanted to troll STW I’d start a thread about e bikes
I left that off the list; IIRC you were for delimited max power in all places sod the eco modes on that thread?
oh yeah, forgot about that one. It was a little tongue in cheek but that is the ebike I want to see, I don't think I said unlimited but I could be wrong. I basically want a downhill bike that I can turbo around constantly for many many miles. I think it would be brilliant fun.
I've been on psyche.co again, this time, an article about 'rhetorical fig leaves', ie the spreading bigoted/prejudiced messages but framed in such a way as to distance oneself from them, the example (of Joe Rogan) given:
This doctor was saying ivermectin is 99 per cent effective in treating Covid, but you don’t hear about it because you can’t fund vaccines when it’s an effective treatment … I don’t know if this guy is right or wrong. I’m just asking questions.
https://psyche.co/ideas/beyond-dogwhistles-racists-have-a-new-rhetorical-trick
"I don’t know if this guy is right or wrong. I’m just asking questions."
Doesn't sound very STW to me.