Parents Raising "Theybies": Letting Kids Decide Their Gender

[Herlock Sholmes]

LOL... it has nothing to do with holding an opposing viewpoint. It has to do with if you make statements that categorize an entire class of people as something, you're a bigot. He's a bigot. His statements, and his hangups about sexuality and any opinion contrary to his make him a bigot. He's a bigot against gays, muslims and women.

You've put forth nothing but opinions championed by the extremist right wing ideology and nothing in support of your statements that is unbiased. But yeah, the problem is "SJWs". Not the actual facts. Because the facts don't actually support your beliefs. A rant by a bigot isn't a fact. A statement by a group that was implemented to put forth their concept of social ideology is not facts. The facts are these: multiple studies have shown that gender isn't binary. Multiple societies have existed with multiple genders. But yeah, the problem is just you know.... SJWS. Not the actual facts. Not actual historic precedent. I can understand why you find this conversation uncomfortable. Because it's rough when the facts don't support your opinions and you just can't accept that. See, I am willing to allow facts to dictate my thinking. I used to think trans and gender issues were BS. Then I did the intelligent thing: I researched to see if the facts supported my opinions. They didn't and I changed my opinion. Everyone should try it.

But nah, just say it's the opposing viewpoint who is to blame, even though you haven't provided a single fact that supports your opinion. Say hi to the flat-earthers and the anti-vaccinators. Y'all are the ones who are going to make the world a better place for sure. If we don't all die of measles and fall off the edge first.

Bye now!

So he’s bigoted against Muslims too? The religion of peace......ok.

[Abby Normal]

This is so interesting to me-and definitely a tough question! I don't think there are any easy answers.

Ally
do you know if there are any scientific studies on children being raised as Theybies on its affects? Maybe too new a thing to do that?

Anyway, on a similar note-I was fascinated (and relieved)to see how quickly and what an early age my kids got the whole gay thing. and they didn't really care-no big deal and they didn't seem to have any confusion, or interest for that matter. They went to a day care affiliated with our church and we have several families with openly gay couples-men and women. so Im wondering is there any real harm in the theybies thing.

I always go back to the poor folks who are born one gender but KNOW they are the other, regardless of what body parts they have. I mean can you imagine the torture these people go through? so Im a little more open to these types of things.

But Could it actually cause confusion that impacts the child negatively, or bullying they would not otherwise get? or getting shunned by the group? Kids can be pretty brutal, even at a young age. It will interesting when they do do the studies, what we learn about this.

[Ally]

No point in continuing here. Someone holds an opposing viewpoint and they’re a bigot. More Ben Shapiro’s and fewer deranged leftist sjw’s and the world would be a better place. I’ll vacate the rabbit-hole and leave you to it.

LOL... it has nothing to do with holding an opposing viewpoint. It has to do with if you make statements that categorize an entire class of people as something, you're a bigot. He's a bigot. His statements, and his hangups about sexuality and any opinion contrary to his make him a bigot. He's a bigot against gays, muslims and women.

You've put forth nothing but opinions championed by the extremist right wing ideology and nothing in support of your statements that is unbiased. But yeah, the problem is "SJWs". Not the actual facts. Because the facts don't actually support your beliefs. A rant by a bigot isn't a fact. A statement by a group that was implemented to put forth their concept of social ideology is not facts. The facts are these: multiple studies have shown that gender isn't binary. Multiple societies have existed with multiple genders. But yeah, the problem is just you know.... SJWS. Not the actual facts. Not actual historic precedent. I can understand why you find this conversation uncomfortable. Because it's rough when the facts don't support your opinions and you just can't accept that. See, I am willing to allow facts to dictate my thinking. I used to think trans and gender issues were BS. Then I did the intelligent thing: I researched to see if the facts supported my opinions. They didn't and I changed my opinion. Everyone should try it.

But nah, just say it's the opposing viewpoint who is to blame, even though you haven't provided a single fact that supports your opinion. Say hi to the flat-earthers and the anti-vaccinators. Y'all are the ones who are going to make the world a better place for sure. If we don't all die of measles and fall off the edge first.

Bye now!

[Herlock Sholmes]

No point in continuing here. Someone holds an opposing viewpoint and they’re a bigot. More Ben Shapiro’s and fewer deranged leftist sjw’s and the world would be a better place. I’ll vacate the rabbit-hole and leave you to it.

[Ally]

Ben Shapiro is a highly intelligent man and to call him bigoted because you disagree with him is exactly the attitude that gives us vacuous, spineless, students and universities trying to ban or silence him and others. This subject is a very small part of a wider issue and the wider issue is vastly the more important one. The issue of freedom of thought and speech and pc idiocy.

No, I'm calling him a bigot because he's a bigot who also believes that homosexuality is a mental disorder, and he also believes that women's designated role is to have children and "civilize men". Men aren't responsible for civilizing themselves, women are responsible for that task. I call him a bigot, because he's a bigot.

And as for you finding one single guy, who is a member of a socially conservative group whose sole purpose was created to push their socially conservative point of view isn't evidence. The American College of Pediatrics that you are quoting and stand by also has the considered position that cohabitation without marriage is damaging to the psych and that kids are more likely to be abused by homosexual parents. This is not unibiased research based opinion. Finding one crackpot who supports your view, against all the weight of both historical and peer-REVIEWED research is a different matter.

Peer reviewed research. Not just anecdotal "beliefs". How many actual unbiased studies has Quentin actually done? Oh right, zero. Just his opinion then. How many peer-reviewed studies are there that say gender is not binary? At least half a dozen I can find in two seconds in multiple psychology journals. And again historically there are dozens of societies that have multiple genders and have functioned just fine.

Once again, just because someone believes it, doesn't make it true.

[Herlock Sholmes]

Looks like this viewpoint isn’t one coming from a minority of bigots?

“Dr. Quentin Van Meter, of the American College of Pediatricians said parents who choose this for their children will subject them to criticism and bullying.

"Parents who do this are purposely putting their children in a situation where they're going to come to a harm, that's why it's abusive," he told CBN News.”

https://areomagazine.com/2018/09/05/...ring-theybies/

Maybe some dissenting voices aren’t bigoted crackpots?

They’ll probably still get labelled as such though.

[Herlock Sholmes]

I'm sorry, is a bigoted ranter who has no foundation in science considered an alternative view point now? A crazy rant that's filled with nothing but invective and no scientific basis, just ranting is not an alternative viewpoint. It's just a rant.

Do you have any factual rebuttal? Multiple cultures throughout history have multiple genders and had actual words and descriptors for them. Multiple genders aren't a new thing.

The fact that science supports this view is apparently irrelevant. If you want to rant about what you believe despite science, feel free. But that puts you nowhere but with the anti-vaxxers and the flat-earthers.

There's what you believe. Then there's science. I'll go with science, you and everyone else are free to believe what you choose. But some idiot ranting in a youtube video isn't evidence of anything, just because it supports your viewpoint.

Once again: multiple societies have historically had multiple concepts of gender. This is not new, and it's not "made up" and it's supported by evidence.

Ben Shapiro is a highly intelligent man and to call him bigoted because you disagree with him is exactly the attitude that gives us vacuous, spineless, students and universities trying to ban or silence him and others. This subject is a very small part of a wider issue and the wider issue is vastly the more important one. The issue of freedom of thought and speech and pc idiocy.

[Ally]

This made chuckle, the suitcase part.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/travel/t...g-options.html

Slippery slope arguments and reductio ad absurdium arguments are traditionally the resort of those few who have no actual argument, so I agree, these sorts of "arguments" are fairly laughable. The more important question is: why does an airline need to know what your gender is in order for you to buy a seat? Why are you required to identify your gender at all? What actual difference does it make when it comes to flying and buying a seat? What possible reason is it of a business, or anyone what you identify as, male or female? How is that information relevant towards a business transaction?

[George Dixon]

This made chuckle, the suitcase part.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/travel/t...g-options.html

[Ally]

An alternative viewpoint.

https://youtu.be/HWHotHWmu1g

I'm sorry, is a bigoted ranter who has no foundation in science considered an alternative view point now? A crazy rant that's filled with nothing but invective and no scientific basis, just ranting is not an alternative viewpoint. It's just a rant.

Do you have any factual rebuttal? Multiple cultures throughout history have multiple genders and had actual words and descriptors for them. Multiple genders aren't a new thing.

The fact that science supports this view is apparently irrelevant. If you want to rant about what you believe despite science, feel free. But that puts you nowhere but with the anti-vaxxers and the flat-earthers.

There's what you believe. Then there's science. I'll go with science, you and everyone else are free to believe what you choose. But some idiot ranting in a youtube video isn't evidence of anything, just because it supports your viewpoint.

Once again: multiple societies have historically had multiple concepts of gender. This is not new, and it's not "made up" and it's supported by evidence.

[c.d.]

Robert, I get that . But things seem to be a little extreme here.

Hello George,

I suggest that you take a look at the history of Pub Talk and the topics that have been discussed. A number of them have resulted in some serious pissing matches. In fact, the one on grammar and spelling (which I unfortunately started) damn near resulted in death threats.

c.d.

[George Dixon]

Robert, I get that . But things seem to be a little extreme here.

[Robert]

George, Casebook has always had pub threads for discussion of non-Ripper topics.

[George Dixon]

Crikey. I thought that I had joined a Jack The Ripper forum.

[Herlock Sholmes]

An alternative viewpoint.

https://youtu.be/HWHotHWmu1g