not every trans person experiences emotional pain or discomfort from being in the body they're living in, and not all trans people need to medically transition to express their identity. i think it's more rare than those who do, but pain or trauma is not an intrinsic property of being trans.
This doesn't really answer anything. You've just repeated the assertion that not every transgender person has (or has had) gender dysphoria.
What is it that makes someone transgender if not a feeling that their body does not match their gender? Is that not the key aspect of being transgender?
These are huge questions that are not being answered with this assertion that being transgender is not even necessarily about a discomfort about one's body.
i've asked for people to post proof of this alleged 'calling someone a transphobe' point at least three times now. please post proof or refrain from it, please.
As I said, you've danced around directly saying it. It is evident from a number of your posts, including this one, that you deliberately frame your views in such a way that anyone that disagrees with them must be a transphobe.
This is you, in this very post:
i am convinced, just as maniak is, that these 'edge cases' such as sports and young people are used deliberately by people who do not have trans people's interests at heart, as a way to rope in otherwise good people and start to insidiously build up anti-trans sentiment.
What exactly are you implying when you say that you are "convinced" that this debate is "used deliberately [...] to insidiously build up anti-trans sentiment" if not that the people engaging in these debates are transphobic?
Explain yourself.
this is all just nonsense frankly.
i have consistently stated that i don't have all the answers, but that we should be trying to promote inclusivity wherever we can, and work towards an acceptable solution for everyone. banning trans people from sports, or banning treatment for young people, is not the answer. hopefully you agree with that at least. they are blunt object solutions to a far more nuanced topic. i have expressed doubts in this thread about certain people - PhilQ being one from a year or two ago, who suggested trans people were not born trans, and have at times linked the type of language used today against trans people (not referring to just this thread) as being similar to that used against gay people 40-50 years ago. this isn't in any way a controversial statement.
Is it nonsense? You are blinded by your own ideological stance on this. You repeatedly reject and ignore evidence presented to you, and remain steadfast and stubborn in your views despite never actually offering any evidence of your own to support them. It was like getting blood out of a stone to get you to even acknowledge that the Tavistock Clinic had a number of failings, despite the evidence of this being repeatedly presented to you, and even then you demonstrated a fundamental lack of comprehension about what these failings meant for the service. You just kept parroting an irrelevant point about the staff doing their best.
It's all well and good claiming not to "have all all the answers" but you cannot repeatedly engage in bad faith debate with people presenting actual evidence to you, offer nothing of your own, all while throwing around accusations of people being "misleading" or "alarmingly sensationalist".
As you're responding to me, and have been almost exclusively for a while now, I simply have not advocated for "banning trans people from sports, or banning treatment for young people". This is once again a gross misrepresentation of what has been said to you, and yet another example of your infuriatingly stubborn refusal to actually engage with the posts you are pretending to respond to.
It has been repeatedly stated by myself and many others that we want children and young people to receive the best possible care. A huge part of this is the medical pathways being extensively researched and evidence based. It has been repeatedly highlighted to you that this is not the case. It is not advocacy for the banning of treatment for young people to point out that current care provision is woefully inadequate.
The issue you seem to be having here is conflation of your blind advocacy for the current treatments, despite the obvious gaps in the evidence supporting them, with these treatments actually being the best thing for these children. They cannot be considered as such, as the Cass Interim Report highlights.
As for the banning of transgender people from sports. This has again not been a suggestion from basically anyone in this thread. Once again it is your own stubborn refusal to acknowledge the solutions presented by sporting bodies, as such, instead conflating your blind advocacy for "inclusion at all costs" policy with this being the only option.
You acknowledge that this is a nuanced topic, bring up "blunt object solutions", yet show absolutely no sign of acknowledging the nuances in this topic or indeed how your own supposed "solutions" are in fact, quite "blunt" themselves.
You have once again failed to respond to any of the numerous things I, or others, have presented to you, and have now decided to present yet another strawman argument by bringing up an essentially random poster who, to my eyes, has barely taken part in this discussion, and by your own acknowledgment made comments "a year or two ago". What has this got to do with anything we've been (supposedly) discussing in relation to the Cass Interim Report?
our understanding is constantly evolving and developing. you say i'm just 'making things up' when leading medical groups worldwide recognise the medical necessity of treatments for gender dysphoria and indeed endorse such treatments. these groups include the likes of the American academy of nursing, oediatrics, physicians, counselling, american medical association, public health association, endocrine society, world medical association, the NHS, and many many others.
Yes, understanding is constantly evolving and developing, and yet, despite their now being increasing acknowledgment that our current treatment processes fall markedly short of the care standards you would expect, you remain unwavering in your support of these exact processes.
Leading medical groups worldwide recognise the medical necessity of treating gender dysphoria, yes. However, it has been pointed out to you on a ridiculous number of occasions now that there is not even a consensus on what gender dysphoria is. It has also been pointed out to you on a ridiculous number of occasions that the current treatment processes are severely inadequate.
I do say you are just making things up, because right here you list a number of groups as if at they all support your views. The NHS services have literally been exposed as being deeply flawed by the very report we have been talking about for ages. A report that you have quite clearly not read.
The American College of Pediatricians have quite literally said that:
Transgender Interventions Harm Children
No Evidence that Transgender Interventions are Safe for Children
https://acpeds.org/transgender-interventions-harm-children
You can read about it there.
I'm not even going to bother looking into what the others are doing because this is quite clearly energy that you are not expending yourself.
Aside from the fact that you have repeatedly just made up things that I'm supposed to have said, you have also consistently misrepresented things and ignored evidence that contradicts your stance.
You posted at the very beginning of this thread that transgender athletes had been able to compete in the Olympics in 2004, but no transgender athlete had ever qualified until Laurel Hubbard. You completely ignored it when it was pointed out to you that the rules regarding access requirements had been drastically changed, and it was only the 2020 Olympics that would realistically see trans-athletes competing for the first time.
You quoted the IOC guidance as evidence for your stance, but when this was changed and acknowledged as inadequate, you suddenly went very quiet.
You repeatedly asserted that Lia Thomas was not dominating the women's category, but again, suddenly went very quiet on the matter when it was pointed out that Thomas had won in the vast majority of races.
More recently, you have repeatedly represented the Tavistock Clinic as an effective service running treatments extensively reviewed by medical experts, despite this quite blatantly not being the case.
i am convinced, just as maniak is, that these 'edge cases' such as sports and young people are used deliberately by people who do not have trans people's interests at heart, as a way to rope in otherwise good people and start to insidiously build up anti-trans sentiment. i'm saying this generally, not talking about anyone in particular in this thread. there is a sweeping anti-trans movement worldwide and especially in the UK, and it's saddens me that transphobic and now even wider LGBT+ abuse is on the rise in this country.
As I said earlier, what on earth is this if not skirting around directly calling individual posters, "transphobes"?
You are incapable of arguing in good faith. You are incapable of addressing the many, researched points that have been put to you. You are incapable of answering any of the reasonable questions asked of you.
At this point, it seems very clear that you are simply nothing more than a troll.