Arguments in favor of disallowing transgender care for minors

[Night FM]

Off the top of my head, here are some arguments:

1. Scientific evidence shows that sex and gender are rooted in genetics. While there are some outdated, "blank slate" theories of mind, these don't seem compatible with modern biology. People may be assigned one sex or the other based on their genitals, however the development of male or female genitals and other physiological differences between male and female is genetic.

2. While it is possible that some individuals are born with a desire to change their sex, meaning it may be related to their biology, this isn't necessarily the case with everyone who wants to do so, and each individual case likely differs.

3. Allowing transgender therapy for minors allows the potential for parents or providers to coax them into it for selfish personal reasons even if they do not need it. (e.x. Such as if providers earn money for prescribing related drugs.)

4. There is evidence showing that symptoms of gender dysphoria can be related to psychological conditions such as autism-spectrum disorders and borderline personality disorder, and that confusion in one's identity is a "normal" part of adolescence, meaning these symptoms can be "grown out" of without the need for non-reversible procedures.

5. There are statistics showing that groups of people are identifying as transgender at rates that exceed the actual statistical occurrences. Some statistics have stated that the actual occurrences of transgender people are less than 1% of the population, while some statistical examples of people identifying as transgender may be higher.

6. Per the above, this implies that people are being influenced by external sources into identifying as transgender, such as media or social media which promotes transgender as an identity. And there is more than enough evidence showing that media can influence people's behavior, especially in an echo chamber-like environment.

7. Some advocates of transgender identity themselves have claimed that transgender is not related to biology or something one is born with, but is essentially just a form of individual expression. As an example, some of these arguments reference the gender schema theory. If so, then this would strongly imply that, while consenting adults can legally do as they please, allowing this type of expression for minors, especially if it involves the use or drugs or surgery is potentially harmful.

---

In summary, I would argue that, if transgender care is available for minors, it should only be allowed if evidence exists that it is due to unusual biological circumstances, meaning it would have to be diagnosed on a case-by-case basis rather than on a blind assumption that everyone who self-identifies as transgender is actually born the way they are.

[CharonY]

Please provide the  current scientific definition of sex and gender before proceeding.

[Night FM]

14 minutes ago, CharonY said:

Please provide the  current scientific definition of sex and gender before proceeding.

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/sex

either of the two major forms of individuals that occur in many species and that are distinguished respectively as female or male especially on the basis of their reproductive organs and structures

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/gender

: sex sense 1a

---

I'm assuming that you're simply arguing that sex and gender are not the same thing. I'm aware of that, however my argument is simply that most people will have the "internal sense" of being male or female which matches their biological sex (just as how one's "internal sense" of "being human" is related to their biology and not something arbitrary).

 

Therefore, if one has an internal sense of being the gender which does not match their biological sex, the burden would be on others to prove that this is due to something that they are born with (e.x. I do acknowledge that people can be born with atypical biology, but this isn't necessarily the case for everyone who identifies as transgender).

Otherwise, it is possible that this inconsistency is due to other non-biological factors, such as the ones I mentioned above, or due to an absurd logical association (e.x. assuming that wearing a dress makes a person a woman, which would be like assuming that eating a banana makes a person a chimpanzee). And that it could be made to be in line with their biological sex rather than requiring them to use drugs or have irreversible surgery.

 

Edited Thursday at 06:07 AM by Night FM

[CharonY]

So now please provide literature (note that in biology the defintion is more narrow for sex as it needs to accomodate all forms of sexual reproduction, not only humans or mammals) that sex and gender are always aligned.

[Night FM]

23 minutes ago, CharonY said:

So now please provide literature (note that in biology the defintion is more narrow for sex as it needs to accomodate all forms of sexual reproduction, not only humans or mammals) that sex and gender are always aligned.

I'm aware that they may not always be aligned, such as in intersex individuals.

However, we can't verify what a person claims their internal gender to be other than their subjective judgment, and, especially when dealing with children who aren't fully-developed in their identity or understandings of the world, their judgment may not be reliable. Especially if their definitions of man are woman aren't based on biological sex.

So how would you assume a person has an internal sense of being human as opposed to another animal, such as a horse? I'll presume that any internal sense a person has of being anything comes from the mind, which biologically is rooted in the brain. And I'm not sure how that could be empirically verified, since biology can only verify things rooted in the physical body, rather than purely psychological things such as one's thoughts or feelings. Though, if a person claims they think or feel they are a certain thing to begin with, it would have to be rooted in some definition of what that thing is, and most definitions of man or woman would therefore fall back on biology.

[iNow]

I’d rather you start by providing arguments why you or the government on your behalf should be empowered to make this decision on behalf of others, their families, and their doctors, especially since you are not being harmed in any way by their choices.

[Phi for All]

On 11/6/2024 at 10:37 PM, Night FM said:

In summary, I would argue that, if transgender care is available for minors, it should only be allowed if evidence exists that it is due to unusual biological circumstances, meaning it would have to be diagnosed on a case-by-case basis

Reasonable, and this is actually the current process, from what I've read.

Quote

... rather than on a blind assumption that everyone who self-identifies as transgender is actually born the way they are.

And here we go, positing that these decisions are made as "blind assumptions", totally negating the admission that case-by-case diagnoses are needed. Make your argument sound reasonable, then accuse the other side of blind assumptions and ridicule the whole process. Lots of hate, lots of misunderstanding, lots of butthurt about people actually trying to be happy in life.