Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
This has to be a hoax, talk about child endangerment and an obvious case of psychological manipulation.
The process started at the age of eight years old, kids are still babies at that age, when it comes to comprehending the world around them; mom and dad are their entire universe. And yet we are to believe this boy, who was raised by lesbians, has always know that being a boy conflicted with the world because he had a ding-dong?
Yes.
As it's been recorded many, many times.
Quote:
I wonder where the boy got the notion that being a boy was somehow abnormal and out of place in this world?
Quite possibly due to the condition known as GID.
Quote:
Who taught the kid, or where did he get the idea, that the hateful genitalia he possessed at birth was.... just wrong, and being a boy was somehow an aberration, and he should become a girl just like mom and dad?
Most certainly not his parents.
Because that would be just plain stupidity to blame parents who have 2 grown boys who grew up without GID and had kids of their own.
But we don't have people with the intellect of a 5th grader here, do we?
Read the article, can't watch the video at work. I understand that the doctors BELIEVE that normal development could take place once the hormone blocking device is removed at a later stage in life. In the meantime this kid is going to school. What sort of effect is this going to have on how he is treated? What if the doctors are wrong and there are consequences to delaying puberty by so many years? Have they even tested this on animals yet? It still seems like child abuse.
But ignoring her threats of cutting off her own penis wouldn't be child abuse. Got it.
Quote:
I stated that I would feel the same way if a heterosexual couple did the same thing. It would still be child abuse.
And while we're on the subject everyone should still refer to the male child as "he" not "her". Doing otherwise is just a liberal attempt to sway opinion by controlling the conversation. It is deceitful and a low-handed debate trick.
Glad to know that ignoring your child's threats of self-mutilation count as "not abusive" in your book. If I find my child on the bathroom floor bleeding from having cut off her penis, I'll just leave her there to die. Doing anything about it, like seeking medical attention and professional help, would be "abusive". I'll be sure to use your standards of abuse when raising my own children in the future.
It's not a debate tactic. It's what Tammy wishes to be called. She asked that she be called Tammy. She has stated more than one that she is a girl. I am respecting her wishes, just as I respect someone's wishes to be called Thomas and not Tom or Tommy, or Mr. Johnson and not Thomas, or Uncle Thomas and not just plain Thomas, etc. It's called having basic respect for other people's choice to decide what they want to be called.
What say you to all the trans children that are not adopted that have cis (non-trans) parents and siblings?
Are you saying, that without modern enlightenment and technology, the kid would just grow up gay? That gay men wouldn't like him because he was too "feminine"?
Is that how it was before there was so much concern and focus on the . . subject?
Not doing anything would force Tammy to choose manhood. In other words, ignoring it and letting Tammy grow up bio-male is making a decision for her. It's forcing the parental decision on her.
Having full-blown sexual reassignment surgery would force Tammy to choose womanhood. That would also be making a decision for her, which is why the parents did not choose that path either.
The hormone-blocking therapy the parents have chosen buys Tammy more time so that she doesn't have to make the decision right now.
No one is forcing her to decide right now. The parents are buying her more time so that she CAN make the decision LATER ON. As in, she is NOT being forced to make a major decision RIGHT NOW.
Did that help clear things up? Or do you still not get it?
Oh no, of course not, no one is forcing their agenda on this boy, and yet even you are calling him Tammy, and referring to him as "she".
Are you saying, that without modern enlightenment and technology, the kid would just grow up gay? That gay men wouldn't like him because he was too "feminine"?
Is that how it was before there was so much concern and focus on the . . subject?
Are you saying, that without modern enlightenment and technology, the kid would just grow up gay? That gay men wouldn't like him because he was too "feminine"?
Is that how it was before there was so much concern and focus on the . . subject?
Too bad there was not a gay gene to be found, then we could abort these children in the first trimester, so they don't have to go thru all this mental anguish, and pain at the young age of eight years old.
Are you saying, that without modern enlightenment and technology, the kid would just grow up gay? That gay men wouldn't like him because he was too "feminine"?
Sexuality != Gender
Without modern day "enlightenment" and technology, Tammy probably would have cut off her dick and then placed in the "funny farm".
Quote:
Originally Posted by ergohead
Is that how it was before there was so much concern and focus on the . . subject?
Self-mutilation and suicide attempts are not uncommon for people with GID whose parents (and other adults) ignore their plea for help.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wapasha
Oh no, of course not, no one is forcing their agenda on this boy, and yet even you are calling him Tammy, and referring to him as "she".
If somebody says "Don't call me Todd, I go by Mike" would you continue to call him Todd?
Too bad there was not a gay gene to be found, then we could abort these children in the first trimester, so they don't have to go thru all this mental anguish, and pain at the young age of eight years old.
GID=/=sexual preference.
Those are two different things.
One can be MTF and still prefer relations with females.
It should not be legal to undergo such unessasary cosmetic and/or hormonal transformations until adulthood.
Although i am not against homosexual marriage, one has to strongly suspect that the parents own heavily biased, politicized perspectives influened then to behave in this sitiation as though there was some greater socio-political point to prove rather than looking at it objectively as what is in the best interest of a very young, still mentally developing child.
And here we go with yet another poster who hasn't read the article or watched the video but jumps at the opportunity to have a good old gay bash. If you had read the article, clearly the parents are NOT making their child undergo "cosmetic or hormonal transformations". They are delaying puberty for a few years so the child can decide for him/herself.
Do you "strongly suspect that the parents own heavily biased, politicized perspectives influenced them" in this story of heterosexual parents in the same situation?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
