Newborn baby may be the first to be registered ‘gender unknown’

[Oling_Roachinen]

Originally Posted by GGG

Serious, do you feel the same way about people with other forms of body dysphoria like feeling your finger shouldn't be on your body?

Right now the best treatment for people who have a different gender than their sex is to let them express themselves how they want to. They still suffer from higher than normal suicide rates. So if you are asking me if you could "cure" your own child from not having gender dysphoria (which is classified as a disorder under ICD-10) I would say yes if it improves the liklyhood of a positive life outcome.

But so do gay and lesbian people. So if your premise is you would be willing to "cure" your child of being transgendered to reduce the chance of suicide or other negative life outcomes, you would have to extend the same premise to curing your homosexual child. If you wouldn't, you're not being honest. Which is what I was asking Resurrection, and his response differed.

[GirlySports]

Originally Posted by Resurrection

Let's no conflate the two issues. Further, I am going a lot further than most by saying that this is a real problem. A lot of people think that there's no such thing as gender identity issues. I'm not saying that. What I am saying is that like homosexuality its a bioligical problem. The difference is I'd never advocate for "curing" homosexuals because a sexual preference is no big deal, and our society is becoming a lot more accepting.

Gender identity is the same thing but it causes enormous hardship on the person because they don't associate with the gender they are at birth. Being born a man and feeling like a woman because of a genetic defect or birth defect that science can narrow down is a hardship that no one would want on their child. I actually find it bizarre anyone would take the other position.

Unless of course you are going to take the stance that gender and sex are societal constructs that can be fluid. In which case I can't even be bothered to debate that, in the same way I don't take anti vaxxer seriously.

I'm going to go down a different rabbit hole. There are definitely homosexual and gender identity issues. But at what point will there no longer be? Ever?
There is an LGBTQ parade every year and that's great. At what point will there no longer be the need for one? 50 years? 100 years? I thought Women's marches would have stopped by now, but they are getting smaller.

[PsYcNeT]

Originally Posted by Oling_Roachinen

But so do gay and lesbian people. So if your premise is you would be willing to "cure" your child of being transgendered to reduce the chance of suicide or other negative life outcomes, you would have to extend the same premise to curing your homosexual child. If you wouldn't, you're not being honest. Which is what I was asking Resurrection, and his response differed.

To be fair, he believes being gay is a choice. I don't think his answer would be worth much in that regard.

[CaptainCrunch]

Originally Posted by CMPunk

Black or white are pretty much your only choices. And even that could be questionable.

Disagree, I think it would be beige would be your only choice.

[White Out 403]

Originally Posted by CorsiHockeyLeague

How is it a defect?

In what way does such a person "fall short" or "lack something desirable"?

Baby is born with a penis, this baby grows up and due to an issue during development in the womb something goes wrong and the baby will wind up identifying as a girl, not as a boy, despite being born with a penis. This is a genetic defect somewhere in the brain.

That's option 1.

Option 2 is that gender, sex, and all those issues are fluid. So there's no such thing as boy/girl/man/woman.

What is it your advocating here exactly?

[CaptainCrunch]

Originally Posted by Resurrection

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/393442...by-registered/



If you want to convince me that gender identity is hard wired into our brain, a biological function that during birth can be messed up and that's why .05% of the population polled has these issues, you will have my buy in. I'd likely treat it as a mental disorder though, and would want that condition to be cured and perhaps something we could "inoculate" against in the future.

If you want to convince me there's nothing about gender that is biological, and it's strictly a societal construct, you've lost me. Science doesn't agree with that, and is pretty solidly against it. Take a biology class.

This woman has essentially given this child a 100% chance to have gender identity issues against the small .05~% chance that they will have a legitimate gender identity issue.

How does this parent know that this baby is gender unknown?

It just feels like this parent is playing politics with this kid or making the race to be the first to do it for fame or whatever.

Or maybe this parent is going to be disappointing if this child grows up with no gender identity issues.

[Oling_Roachinen]

Originally Posted by Resurrection

The difference is I'd never advocate for "curing" homosexuals because a sexual preference is no big deal, and our society is becoming a lot more accepting.

Which is great, our society has progressed to a point that being gay is no big deal. (And I'm sure that millions of people will disagree with you here, but I enjoy the optimism).

Originally Posted by Resurrection

Gender identity is the same thing but it causes enormous hardship on the person because they don't associate with the gender they are at birth. Being born a man and feeling like a woman because of a genetic defect or birth defect that science can narrow down is a hardship that no one would want on their child. I actually find it bizarre anyone would take the other position.

So why not do what we've done with homosexuality and make it more accepting? Progress so that being transgendered is no big deal. How about we don't call for the cure, the same way people were calling for the cure of the dreaded homosexuality disease.

I mean, it wasn't long ago (hell, even in the west it's happening today), that being gay was terrible that no one would want on their child either. I can't believe you can't see the parallels.

[White Out 403]

Originally Posted by GirlySports

I'm going to go down a different rabbit hole. There are definitely homosexual and gender identity issues. But at what point will there no longer be? Ever?
There is an LGBTQ parade every year and that's great. At what point will there no longer be the need for one? 50 years? 100 years? I thought Women's marches would have stopped by now, but they are getting smaller.

In 50 years we will have the technology to screen and repair babies as they're developing in their mother. Gender identity issues will go away entirely because no one will want their baby to be born a boy or girl and yet think they're the other. If thats a controversial statement, fine. Deal with it.

What IS more controversial is what will happen with the gay community. Will parents who are having a baby be allowed to 'fix' the gay gene? Will a law prevent it? Or will having a gay child be some weird badge of honour and the gay population will explode when parents choose to have gay children? Silly to consider but the tech will get us there.

[CorsiHockeyLeague]

Originally Posted by Resurrection

Baby is born with a penis, this baby grows up and due to an issue during development in the womb something goes wrong and the baby will wind up identifying as a girl, not as a boy, despite being born with a penis. This is a genetic defect somewhere in the brain.

That's option 1.

Option 2 is that gender, sex, and all those issues are fluid. So there's no such thing as boy/girl/man/woman.

What is it your advocating here exactly?

First, this is a false dilemma.

Second, you're assuming that something "went wrong" during development rather than assuming a random mutation that doesn't have any "good" or "bad" connotations in and of itself.

Third, and most importantly, that you've once again just asserted "this is a genetic defect" without explaining, at any point, why it meets the definition of "defect", which I've just given you verbatim from the OED. Again, what does a transgender person lack that would be desirable to have? What characteristic or feature do you think they do not possess that would improve them, and why do you think it would improve them? Please let us know.

[Hockeyguy15]

Originally Posted by Resurrection

In 50 years we will have the technology to screen and repair babies as they're developing in their mother. Gender identity issues will go away entirely because no one will want their baby to be born a boy or girl and yet think they're the other. If thats a controversial statement, fine. Deal with it.

What IS more controversial is what will happen with the gay community. Will parents who are having a baby be allowed to 'fix' the gay gene? Will a law prevent it? Or will having a gay child be some weird badge of honour and the gay population will explode when parents choose to have gay children? Silly to consider but the tech will get us there.

What could go wrong?

[REDVAN]

It's clear to me that Resurrection is not a parent.

[White Out 403]

Originally Posted by Oling_Roachinen

So why not do what we've done with homosexuality and make it more accepting? Progress so that being transgendered is no big deal. How about we don't call for the cure, the same way people were calling for the cure of the dreaded homosexuality disease.

I mean, it wasn't long ago (hell, even in the west it's happening today), that being gay was terrible that no one would want on their child either. I can't believe you can't see the parallels.

We should be more accepting, absolutely. But we should do so with the understanding it's something that we want science to cure and fix.

Simple question. If science came out with a vaccine to prevent all children from ever getting down syndrome and another for having gender identity issues, and all the mom had to do was take a simple pill before 1 months pregnancy to guarantee that their child wont have these issues... would you condone it? Would you advocate them? Would you fight against them? Or would you think the down syndrome inoculation was ok but not the gender identity issue one?

[CorsiHockeyLeague]

Originally Posted by Resurrection

We should be more accepting, absolutely. But we should do so with the understanding it's something that we want science to cure and fix.

You still haven't explained why we would want science to do this.

[White Out 403]

Originally Posted by CorsiHockeyLeague

First, this is a false dilemma.

Second, you're assuming that something "went wrong" during development rather than assuming a random mutation that doesn't have any "good" or "bad" connotations in and of itself.

Third, and most importantly, that you've once again just asserted "this is a genetic defect" without explaining, at any point, why it meets the definition of "defect", which I've just given you verbatim from the OED. Again, what does a transgender person lack that would be desirable to have? What characteristic or feature do you think they do not possess that would improve them, and why do you think it would improve them? Please let us know.

Before we can continue I really need to know if you consider gender a fluid, societal construct, or, a biological one. Otherwise we aren't even speaking the same language.

[Azure]

Originally Posted by CorsiHockeyLeague

You still haven't explained why we would want science to do this.

Because it is a problem not as easily solved by just 'saying' or 'choosing' to live a certain way?

Most people that are transgender don't have as simple a solution to their condition as just saying they are 'gay' and getting married to another 'gay' person.

I'm not sure allowing a parent to identify a baby a certain way is in any way progress for this issue.

[Oling_Roachinen]

Originally Posted by Resurrection

We should be more accepting, absolutely. But we should do so with the understanding it's something that we want science to cure and fix.

Which again, how do you differ this from homosexuality?

You've already said you would never advocate for curing homosexuality because it's no "big deal." But you've yet to make a case why being transgendered is? Other than because you think homosexuality is cool (which again, great) but transgender isn't.

Live and let live. If you want the world to be more accepting maybe we can start by not advocating to cure all transgendered people and calling them defects. It's a small start.

[Hockeyguy15]

Originally Posted by Resurrection

Before we can continue I really need to know if you consider gender a fluid, societal construct, or, a biological one. Otherwise we aren't even speaking the same language.

Not trying to be a dick, but I don't understand why this matters to you?Either way someone for whatever reason identifies with the other sex.

Regardless if it's a biological or societal cause why should it matter to me?

[CorsiHockeyLeague]

Originally Posted by Resurrection

Before we can continue I really need to know if you consider gender a fluid, societal construct, or, a biological one. Otherwise we aren't even speaking the same language.

Human beings are a sexually dimorphic species. There are two sexes - male and female. That is a distinct concept from "gender", which may not match a person's biological sex, and may be "fluid" in the sense that it's discovered over time. It's also possible to describe gender in the form of a "continuum".

However, none of these things are "social constructs". In this context the term "social construct" would apply to things like gender roles that are entrenched in culture, e.g. associating cooking with femininity.

Now that I've answered your question, will you answer mine, or will you simply attempt to use my response to distract from what I suspect is your inability to logically defend your own views on this topic?

[OutOfTheCube]

In a few more years they'll be able to start their own circus act.

[CaptainCrunch]

Doty, who prefers to be referred to as “they” rather than “he” or “she”, told CBC they are “raising Searyl in such a way that until they have the sense of self and command of vocabulary to tell me who they are.”
They added: “I’m recognising them as a baby and trying to give them all the love and support to be the most whole person that they can be outside of the restrictions that come with the boy box and the girl box.”

This almost sounds like Doty, they whatever is going to create a gender confusion with this child.