Story: "Trans teen regrets his ‘Frankenstein’ transition."

  • Thread starter Thread starter mdgspencer
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Mutilation as well?
Sure. Nobody would think twice about removing a cancerous penis or testicles (it happens all the time) to save the patient’s life; or to castrate a man with advanced prostate cancer which won’t save his life, but may prolong it somewhat.

If a patient is suicidal because of his or her genitals, do we say “too bad, so sad, here’s a good length of rope, see you in eternity”? Or do we offer the best, albeit far from perfect, treatment that we have while continuing research to find something better?
 
Last edited:
Sure. Nobody would think twice about removing a cancerous penis or testicles (it happens all the time) to save the patient’s life; or to castrate a man with advanced prostate cancer which won’t save his life, but may prolong it somewhat.
You clearly have no understanding of what mutilation is.

Mutilation serves no medical purpose.
 
Last edited:
No it doesn’t. It only serves the devil’s purpose to sow doubt, confusion and denial of God’s holy creation.
Man and woman He created them.
 
Last edited:
You clearly have no understanding of what mutilation is.

Mutilation serves no medical purpose.
Ad hominem not withstanding, yes I do understand what mutilation is.

In the case of transgendered people, it isn’t “mutilation”, it is life-saving medical treatment.
Man and woman He created them.
Except when He didn’t. Look up:

AIS
Ambiguous genitalia
46, XX intersex
46, XY intersex
True gonadal intersex
etc.
 
Last edited:
In the case of transgendered people, it isn’t “mutilation”, it is life-saving medical treatment.
Again, you clearly do not understand what mutilation is.

Mutilation does not serve a medical purpose.
It simply destroys an otherwise healthy individual.

We are not discussing diseased sex organs, we are discussing individuals that somehow believe they are the wrong sex. And medical “doctors” willing to mutilate these individuals to make it appear that they are.
No true treatment has taken place. All that has been done is the otherwise healthy organs have been destroyed to continue a false belief.
 
Again, you clearly do not understand what mutilation is.

Mutilation does not serve a medical purpose.
It simply destroys an otherwise healthy individual.

We are not discussing diseased sex organs, we are discussing individuals that somehow believe they are the wrong sex. And medical “doctors” willing to mutilate these individuals to make it appear that they are.
No true treatment has taken place. All that has been done is the otherwise healthy organs have been destroyed to continue a false belief.
Look, please lay off the ad hominems.

We disagree on whether treatment of the transgendered is medically-necessary or not. I fully understand what mutilation is. However:
Mutilation does not serve a medical purpose.
It simply destroys an otherwise healthy individual.
These are not healthy individuals. They have a serious health issue that requires some form of treatment. In some, psychological support is all that is required. In others, more radical treatment is required to prevent more serious harm, such as attempted or successful suicide. In others, a treatment somewhere in between the extremes is called for.

It pre-supposes that we are treating a person, not an organ, which is I think the point that is lost on many in this debate.
 
Last edited:
Look, please lay off the ad hominems.
It is not an ad hominem to point out that you clearly do not understand when it is, in fact, clear and demonstrated.
We disagree on whether treatment of the transgendered is medically-necessary or not. I fully understand what mutilation is.
Cutting up perfectly healthy organs is mutilation.
Attempted surgery to correct malformed or diseased organs is not mutilation.
The last few responses demonstrate some, including yourself, fail to recognize this distinction.
These are not healthy individuals. They have a serious health issue that requires some form of treatment. In some, psychological support is all that is required. In others, more radical treatment is required to prevent more serious harm, such as attempted or successful suicide. In others, a treatment somewhere in between the extremes is called for.
If someone has a psychological issue with their skin, the answer is not to mutilate the skin. The answer is to treat the underlying psychological condition.
 
This subject touches a raw nerve. Can anyone here please explain why the left promotes, and in fact teaches this horror to young children without any concern whatsoever for the damage they’re causing these young minds??? I can’t help but believe that these kids are being used as lab rabbits for the LGBT’s sick agenda. What an absolute abomination!

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opin...ndergartners-about-gender-identity-seriously/


 
It is not an ad hominem to point out that you clearly do not understand when it is, in fact, clear and demonstrated.
No it is an ad hominem to imply I don’t know something when we what we disagree on is the application of the notion. You say that removing a healthy organ is mutilation. I say that removing an organ that is causing suicidal levels of distress is a medical treatment though I would agree it is a far from perfect solution. It would be mutilation if it provided no benefit to the patient. In the case of gender-confirming surgery, it provides an important benefit in the majority of patients on whom it is performed.
Cutting up perfectly healthy organs is mutilation.
Which is exactly what was done routinely, with Church-approval, in men with advanced prostate cancer: completely healthy testicles were amputated, in order to remove the testosterone that the cancer used as fuel. And while medication exists that does the same or better today, it is still the most cost-effective means of slowing the growth of prostate cancer and many men still use it by choice to avoid the serious side effects and high costs of the medication.
If someone has a psychological issue with their skin, the answer is not to mutilate the skin. The answer is to treat the underlying psychological condition.
Yes, in a perfect world. Alas no psychiatric or medical treatment has so far proven effective to treat transgenderism, other than some degree of gender reassignment. Unlike schizophrenia, bipolar disorder or clinical depression, the only effective medication so far that works for transgenderism is taking hormones of the target gender. In some individuals that is sufficient. In others, a more drastic treatment is required. Nobody is promoting the need to cut off an organ when a medication and lifestyle changes will do the job. WPATH standards of care are clear on that.

Again, we treat the whole person.
 
Look at the original post.
You are defending mutilation of healthy organs to better suit an unhealthy and distorted view of reality.
This does not make a person better suited to reality, it attempts to warp reality to suit a psychological problem.
 
Yes, in a perfect world. Alas no psychiatric or medical treatment has so far proven effective to treat transgenderism, other than some degree of gender reassignment.
I see.
So not knowing how to treat is license to mutilate?
This is the same mentality that brought us frontal lobotomies through the first half of the 20th century for anyone with some condition that was little understood or just too inconvenient to treat.
 
I’m 100% in favor of giving people with gender dysphoria empathy. A friend’s child is trans. The first step there is to make sure your child doesn’t kill themselves; get the help that they need.

I think where the waters got truly muddied had nothing to do with the arguments being brought up here, to be honest. Most people I know, Catholics, presented with honest medical science evidence want to find ways to help trans people, and dont’ want discrimination done against them.

The whole mixture of gender/sex/dysphoria as a human rights issue and not a medical one is the problem. The causes of dysphoria seem to be multifactorial. We have strong evidence that some types of dysphoria are caused by biology. However, we also have strong evidence that some are experiencing a passing stage; or that the dysphoria is not it’s own condition but rather a symptom of something deeper. We have people that are pushing to have dysphoria eliminated as a mental illness; but in some cases it may well be!

There has been a conflation between ‘assessment, discernment of difficult issues, and treatment’ and ‘phobia and discrimination’. And that is WRONG.

If you try to study the causes and come up with an unpopular conclusion, like Ray Blanchard, the doctor 100% in support of surgery for adults but not children, you can get labled as ‘phobic’. This is made worse by the general political climate where equality is poorly understood.

If you want to support a trans person, but might not want biological boy competing with your daughter in wrestling, volleyball, track or whatever because you want her to have a fair chance you aren’t a phobic monster. Looking at someone who has gender dysphoria but completely ignoring their biological sex in areas where their biological sex matters is both foolish and not doing a good service to people suffering from gender dysphoria or those around them.

In short, we have a social/medical situation in which there has been a large increase in people, particularly children, are coming out as trans. The causes aren’t immediately clear and we don’t have a great diagnostic model in place. However, there is now a political component where actively questioning the causes or questioning drastic changes made to accomodate this increase, is considered discriminatory and bigoted. THAT is where I think most of the issues come from.

So, for something like AIS where we have a clear diagnosis, things are easier; and most would be willing to try to find ways to accomodate them when possible. But for the boy who has no physical diagnosis but who just now ‘identifies’ as a girl and wants to join a girls powerlifting competition… that is a MUCH harder thing to discern. And the waters got muddied by those who say ‘Well! She’s a 6’1 255lbs girl now! Deal with it you bigot!’
 
Last edited:
You say that removing a healthy organ is mutilation. I say that removing an organ that is causing suicidal levels of distress is a medical treatment though I would agree it is a far from perfect solution.
The discussion here is really: should we remove the brain or the sex? Either you believe the brain is whacked and we can’t fix or you believe it’s physical and we can fix it. If it’s the sex that’s whacked then, fine, it’s not mutilation. If it’s the brain we again have two possibilities: either we can’t do anything with the brain, or we can attempt to change physically what is felt to be ar issue (the sexual organs). That could be argued to be mutilation.
I think the last option only becomes void because of the high suicide rate even with the “treatment.” That to me suggests it’s not the way to go and we’re fumbling in the dark.
 
Last edited:
Sure. Nobody would think twice about removing a cancerous penis or testicles (it happens all the time) to save the patient’s life; or to castrate a man with advanced prostate cancer which won’t save his life, but may prolong it somewhat.

If a patient is suicidal because of his or her genitals, do we say “too bad, so sad, here’s a good length of rope, see you in eternity”? Or do we offer the best, albeit far from perfect, treatment that we have while continuing research to find something better?
By your logic, if a mother had suicidal thoughts about a child in her womb, she should be encouraged to have an abortion.
 
Can anyone here please explain why the left promotes, and in fact teaches this horror to young children without any concern whatsoever for the damage they’re causing these young minds???
I would not categorize this as Left or Right. Rather this emerges from rejecting the order that God placed, and creating an order that is based on new definitions of values (e.g. equality, self-determination, worth and dignity of all life, etc.). Thus for example if we were to use labels to distinguish different types of Catholics, such as Traditional Catholic, Conservative Catholic and Progressive Catholic, each of them would have a different view of Catholic life based on these values. Some will fit modern understanding into the traditional understanding, while others will reject modern understanding altogether, and some harmonize both sides.
 
By your logic, if a mother had suicidal thoughts about a child in her womb, she should be encouraged to have an abortion.
Not really. Abortion is a greater evil than removing an organ. Apples and oranges.
 
I think the last option only becomes void because of the high suicide rate even with the “treatment.” That to me suggests it’s not the way to go and we’re fumbling in the dark.
Can you provide evidence that the suicide rate is higher after treatment?
 
I would not categorize this as Left or Right…

Thus for example if we were to use labels to distinguish different types of Catholics, such as Traditional Catholic, Conservative Catholic and Progressive Catholic, each of them would have a different view of Catholic life based on these values.
Thus it would be the progressive Catholic, and liberals in general that would promote the teaching of transgenderism to minors. Most certainly not Traditional Catholics, Conservative Catholics or conservatives…period!!!
 
Last edited:
Can you provide evidence that the suicide rate is higher after treatment?
No, and that’s also not what I said, but I have seen a few Christian sites quoting near identical suicide rates before and after. I don’t have time to look right now, but I remember reading one article (maybe about a year ago?) claiming there was a huge bias against using the suicide stats in secular media.
 
I just did a google and found something. It’s one guy citing two studies 10 years apart. I haven’t looked into the studies he cites, so feel free to do your own deeper research.


@OraLabora I just wanted to say that I’ll pray for your daughter and that I have huge respect for the fact that this is a part of your life and experience. The rest of us can only worry on the sidelines, and in the end I pray just as much for a greater understanding of the issues at hand, for both of us. 🙏
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top