Parents of trans teenager in Texas investigated for "child abuse" after suicide attempt

[Mercenary]

I oppose hormone therapy for minors, but I oppose the government getting involves and telling parenta what to do even more. One day you have the government telling others to do what you want but soon you have others using the government to make you do what they want. :/

[Dr. Arch]

When people say that transexual teens are being discriminated against when people question these interventions they are being disingenuous or ignorant.  

"Transsexual" is kind of like saying "negro". It's an outdated term no longer used in polite society and mostly used by bigots in 2022. Just letting you know. Do with that information what you want.

Really... On the same level? Are you sure about that comparison?

I'm sure about the fact that I said "kind of like" and not "exactly like".

Not even comparable. Outdated? Yes. Comparable? No.

The original post was a comparison, and there were far better analogues.

[T'Chenka]

When people say that transexual teens are being discriminated against when people question these interventions they are being disingenuous or ignorant.  

"Transsexual" is kind of like saying "negro". It's an outdated term no longer used in polite society and mostly used by bigots in 2022. Just letting you know. Do with that information what you want.

Really... On the same level? Are you sure about that comparison?

I'm sure about the fact that I said "kind of like" and not "exactly like".

Not even comparable. Outdated? Yes. Comparable? No.

The original post was a comparison, and there were far better analogues.

Yeah, well, you know... that's just like, your opinion, man.

[John Dule]

Opposition to puberty blockers makes no sense if your position is that children should wait until adulthood before making the decision to transition. It would literally delay the irreversible effects of puberty. Forcing them to go through the wrong puberty isn’t going to help the situation. If they ultimately decide not to transition, then they can go off the puberty blockers - they are reversible, and acting like they aren’t is disingenuous.

This is actually something where I'm legitimately curious about the conservative position. The thinking seems to be that children are categorically unable to consent to the changes that come along with HRT – i.e., the changes that come with the puberty associated with the opposite sex. How, then, can they consent to the changes that come with the puberty associated with their sex? Surely it's simply a naturalistic fallacy to differentiate between them because one happens normally and one doesn't, right? This would imply that (absent side effects) puberty blockers should be not only allowed but mandatory until 18, no? But I doubt that many conservatives would countenance such a position for a second. This seems like a glaring hole, and I feel like it can't be the case that no conservative has ever thought of this contradiction before.

This is one of those things where you have to roll up your sleeves and put in some real hard work to confuse yourself about it.

[Christian Man]

Went back to the original thread where the original child abuse policy was announced. Here's a list of posters who deflected this and turned the thread into a debate about puberty blockers, minimized the obvious cruelty and stupidity behind this policy, or outright showed support behind it and agreed with its sentiment.

John Dule
TheTarHeelGent
Mr. Reactionary
Conservatopia
Sprouts
ShadowOfTheWave
realisticidealist
Christian Man
DaleCooper
Xeuma
Okthisisnotepic.
heatcharger
Abdullah
Grassroots
PiT
Averroës Nix
BabyAlligator
DelTachi
Russian Bear
Farmlands
RFayette
Shua
TheReckoning
BG-NY
DeadPrez
Horus

 every single one of you.

To the likes of John Dule and DaleCooper, you aren't smarter or better than other people by trying to turn everything into a game to where if you show any kind of emotion you lose. There are real lives that are being impacted because politics is not a ing middle school debate team competition.

To the conservatives, the policies you support are evil. You are all aware of this deep down but refuse to admit it to yourselves. You will happily waive away the continued suffering of others caused by the politicians you support because you are so selfish and depraved that you can not possibly show any ounce of compassion or sympathy towards other human beings. You will cling onto your twisted and morally bankrupted understanding of Christianity that in your mind somehow justifies the continued abuse of anyone who isn't like you.

Mention me all you want but Abdullah is one of the nicest/least offensive posters on here.

[🐒Gods of Prosperity🔱🐲💸]

Opposition to puberty blockers makes no sense if your position is that children should wait until adulthood before making the decision to transition. It would literally delay the irreversible effects of puberty. Forcing them to go through the wrong puberty isn’t going to help the situation. If they ultimately decide not to transition, then they can go off the puberty blockers - they are reversible, and acting like they aren’t is disingenuous.

This is actually something where I'm legitimately curious about the conservative position. The thinking seems to be that children are categorically unable to consent to the changes that come along with HRT – i.e., the changes that come with the puberty associated with the opposite sex. How, then, can they consent to the changes that come with the puberty associated with their sex? Surely it's simply a naturalistic fallacy to differentiate between them because one happens normally and one doesn't, right? This would imply that (absent side effects) puberty blockers should be not only allowed but mandatory until 18, no? But I doubt that many conservatives would countenance such a position for a second. This seems like a glaring hole, and I feel like it can't be the case that no conservative has ever thought of this contradiction before.

It does come down mainly to whether you believe an appeal to Nature is a legitimate argument. As in, whether you believe maybe God &/or Evolution kinda knew what it was doing and so you give it the benefit of the doubt.

[DaleCooper]

Opposition to puberty blockers makes no sense if your position is that children should wait until adulthood before making the decision to transition. It would literally delay the irreversible effects of puberty. Forcing them to go through the wrong puberty isn’t going to help the situation. If they ultimately decide not to transition, then they can go off the puberty blockers - they are reversible, and acting like they aren’t is disingenuous.

This is actually something where I'm legitimately curious about the conservative position. The thinking seems to be that children are categorically unable to consent to the changes that come along with HRT – i.e., the changes that come with the puberty associated with the opposite sex. How, then, can they consent to the changes that come with the puberty associated with their sex? Surely it's simply a naturalistic fallacy to differentiate between them because one happens normally and one doesn't, right? This would imply that (absent side effects) puberty blockers should be not only allowed but mandatory until 18, no? But I doubt that many conservatives would countenance such a position for a second. This seems like a glaring hole, and I feel like it can't be the case that no conservative has ever thought of this contradiction before.

This is one of those things where you have to roll up your sleeves and put in some real hard work to confuse yourself about it.

It honestly might be one of the most outrageously absurd posts I've ever read on Atlas. I don't even think the lime green NY avatar could top it.

[Klobmentum Mutilated Herself]

Opposition to puberty blockers makes no sense if your position is that children should wait until adulthood before making the decision to transition. It would literally delay the irreversible effects of puberty. Forcing them to go through the wrong puberty isn’t going to help the situation. If they ultimately decide not to transition, then they can go off the puberty blockers - they are reversible, and acting like they aren’t is disingenuous.

This is actually something where I'm legitimately curious about the conservative position. The thinking seems to be that children are categorically unable to consent to the changes that come along with HRT – i.e., the changes that come with the puberty associated with the opposite sex. How, then, can they consent to the changes that come with the puberty associated with their sex? Surely it's simply a naturalistic fallacy to differentiate between them because one happens normally and one doesn't, right? This would imply that (absent side effects) puberty blockers should be not only allowed but mandatory until 18, no? But I doubt that many conservatives would countenance such a position for a second. This seems like a glaring hole, and I feel like it can't be the case that no conservative has ever thought of this contradiction before.

This is one of those things where you have to roll up your sleeves and put in some real hard work to confuse yourself about it.

It honestly might be one of the most outrageously absurd posts I've ever read on Atlas. I don't even think the lime green NY avatar could top it.

No lime green avatar could top it, but your friendly neighborhood forest green WI avatar has written, essentially, that exact post which you think is so outrageously absurd.

[Lexii, harbinger of chaos and sexual anarchy]

Went back to the original thread where the original child abuse policy was announced. Here's a list of posters who deflected this and turned the thread into a debate about puberty blockers, minimized the obvious cruelty and stupidity behind this policy, or outright showed support behind it and agreed with its sentiment.

John Dule
TheTarHeelGent
Mr. Reactionary
Conservatopia
Sprouts
ShadowOfTheWave
realisticidealist
Christian Man
DaleCooper
Xeuma
Okthisisnotepic.
heatcharger
Abdullah
Grassroots
PiT
Averroës Nix
BabyAlligator
DelTachi
Russian Bear
Farmlands
RFayette
Shua
TheReckoning
BG-NY
DeadPrez
Horus

 every single one of you.

To the likes of John Dule and DaleCooper, you aren't smarter or better than other people by trying to turn everything into a game to where if you show any kind of emotion you lose. There are real lives that are being impacted because politics is not a ing middle school debate team competition.

To the conservatives, the policies you support are evil. You are all aware of this deep down but refuse to admit it to yourselves. You will happily waive away the continued suffering of others caused by the politicians you support because you are so selfish and depraved that you can not possibly show any ounce of compassion or sympathy towards other human beings. You will cling onto your twisted and morally bankrupted understanding of Christianity that in your mind somehow justifies the continued abuse of anyone who isn't like you.

Mention me all you want but Abdullah is one of the nicest/least offensive posters on here.

Isn't he also on of the site's most conservative (outright reactionary at times) posters on LGBT issues?

[DaleCooper]

Opposition to puberty blockers makes no sense if your position is that children should wait until adulthood before making the decision to transition. It would literally delay the irreversible effects of puberty. Forcing them to go through the wrong puberty isn’t going to help the situation. If they ultimately decide not to transition, then they can go off the puberty blockers - they are reversible, and acting like they aren’t is disingenuous.

This is actually something where I'm legitimately curious about the conservative position. The thinking seems to be that children are categorically unable to consent to the changes that come along with HRT – i.e., the changes that come with the puberty associated with the opposite sex. How, then, can they consent to the changes that come with the puberty associated with their sex? Surely it's simply a naturalistic fallacy to differentiate between them because one happens normally and one doesn't, right? This would imply that (absent side effects) puberty blockers should be not only allowed but mandatory until 18, no? But I doubt that many conservatives would countenance such a position for a second. This seems like a glaring hole, and I feel like it can't be the case that no conservative has ever thought of this contradiction before.

This is one of those things where you have to roll up your sleeves and put in some real hard work to confuse yourself about it.

It honestly might be one of the most outrageously absurd posts I've ever read on Atlas. I don't even think the lime green NY avatar could top it.

No lime green avatar could top it, but your friendly neighborhood forest green WI avatar has written, essentially, that exact post which you think is so outrageously absurd.

It comes up every now and then. It's a very silly statement to make, but some apparently think it's compelling. It further demonstrates that the divide between what different sides of the political aisle view as reality is growing.

[GALeftist]

OK, so I guess that answers my question, lol. Large amounts of people apparently believe that appealing to nature is a-OK, even posters who are obviously smart enough to know better.

Not to put too fine a point on it, but whether something is natural or not is not a point for or against it from an ethical perspective. Example: which is more natural, a hunter-gatherer society with a median life expectancy in the 20s or a modern society with a median life expectancy in the 80s? Which is ethically superior? Which is more natural, dying of cancer or ameliorating it via the use of modern medicine? Which is ethically superior?

I also want to address the most common counterargument to this (which shua kind of brought up), which is the argument that you should defer to nature in the absence of evidence that you shouldn't do so. I am not wholly convinced that this is the case, but even if we accept it as an axiom, it is irrelevant in this particular case because there is compelling evidence that transitioning significantly improves the lives of those with gender dysphoria and as far as I know zero such evidence to the contrary. This isn't deferring to the more natural option in the absence of evidence; this is overriding evidence in pursuit of the more natural option.

Anyway, to those of you claiming that this point is "confused" or "outrageously absurd," if you have any actual criticisms to make of the argument then as I said originally I'd love to hear them, but if not perhaps try to break out of your bubble and consider that your position might not be as bulletproof as you thought rather than name-calling. There's really no shame in it.

[Schiff for Senate]

https://twitter.com/SawyerHackett/status/1534664361733677057
Get the government out of our lives cmon it's not hard. That's what it boils down to. Live and let live. This is the opposite of that.

The entire ‘small government’ philosophy the GOP parrots is a farce. All they really mean by it is tax breaks for the rich. Beyond that, they and the ultra-authoritarian rabid religious right want anything but a small government. They want a prying, authoritarian government that sticks its nose into Americans’ bedrooms and tries to come between two consenting adults, parents and.their children, and women and their doctors. Make no mistake on this.

Also the thread title is wrong. The ‘after’ really should be ‘causing.’ You’re juxtaposing the cause and the effect there.

I assume you don’t think this child’s suicide attempt was caused by his transition, given the rest of the content of your post, so I’ll just clear it up — the suspected abuse that the hospital had to report was that this kid’s parents had allowed him to go on HRT.

Ohh I get it now. You’re right.

[Libertas Vel Mors]

If in any other circumstance a child attempted suicide after their parents mutilated them, there would be an investigation at the very least. Not sure why this should be any different here.

[Klobmentum Mutilated Herself]

If in any other circumstance a child attempted suicide after their parents mutilated them, there would be an investigation at the very least. Not sure why this should be any different here.

Hormone therapy is mutilation? Even when the kid has probably only been on hormones for a short time? How many times do transphobes have to he told that minors do not get genital surgery for you to stop pretending that that is the case? If a circumcised kid attempts suicide, should the parents be on the hook? What about a cancer survivor who went through chemo, what if they attempt suicide? What about a cis teen who got a nose job? Has it occurred to you that the kid is transitioning not because his parents want him to, but because he wants to?

[Libertas Vel Mors]

If in any other circumstance a child attempted suicide after their parents mutilated them, there would be an investigation at the very least. Not sure why this should be any different here.

Hormone therapy is mutilation? Even when the kid has probably only been on hormones for a short time? How many times do transphobes have to he told that minors do not get genital surgery for you to stop pretending that that is the case? If a circumcised kid attempts suicide, should the parents be on the hook? What about a cancer survivor who went through chemo, what if they attempt suicide? What about a cis teen who got a nose job?

Hormone therapy is mutilation, yes. Circumcision and cancer treatments are not mutilation. Nose rings are mutilation, but of a far lower degree than hormone therapy and are reversible without medical impact.

[Klobmentum Mutilated Herself]

If in any other circumstance a child attempted suicide after their parents mutilated them, there would be an investigation at the very least. Not sure why this should be any different here.

Hormone therapy is mutilation? Even when the kid has probably only been on hormones for a short time? How many times do transphobes have to he told that minors do not get genital surgery for you to stop pretending that that is the case? If a circumcised kid attempts suicide, should the parents be on the hook? What about a cancer survivor who went through chemo, what if they attempt suicide? What about a cis teen who got a nose job?

Hormone therapy is mutilation, yes. Circumcision, cancer treatments, and nose rings are not mutilation.

Cutting off a part of a child's genitals without their consent is not mutilation, but a teenager choosing to take a hormone pill prescribed by a doctor is mutilation? Does this extend to trans adults — have I mutilated myself? Has it occurred to you that the kid is transitioning not because his parents want him to, but because he wants to?

And I said nose job, not nose ring. Lots of minors get nose jobs, but their parents have to consent to it legally. Is that mutilation? Should the parents be investigated if such a person attempted suicide?

And I suppose you'd argue that parents who oppose their trans children's transition, often violently, are off the hook if the trans kid attempts suicide?

Chemo is a medical treatment for a medical condition, just like HRT.

[OSR stands with Israel]

Hormone Therapy should be banned for anyone who is under 18 but only the doctors should be held legally responsible

[fhtagn]

If in any other circumstance a child attempted suicide after their parents mutilated them, there would be an investigation at the very least. Not sure why this should be any different here.

Hormone therapy is mutilation? Even when the kid has probably only been on hormones for a short time? How many times do transphobes have to he told that minors do not get genital surgery for you to stop pretending that that is the case? If a circumcised kid attempts suicide, should the parents be on the hook? What about a cancer survivor who went through chemo, what if they attempt suicide? What about a cis teen who got a nose job? Has it occurred to you that the kid is transitioning not because his parents want him to, but because he wants to?

Regarding the bolded bit:
I don't know if you just don't know this or are being dishonest, but assuming you don't know, there absolutely are surgeons who will perform those surgeries on minors. So his concern is legitimate.

[Klobmentum Mutilated Herself]

If in any other circumstance a child attempted suicide after their parents mutilated them, there would be an investigation at the very least. Not sure why this should be any different here.

Hormone therapy is mutilation? Even when the kid has probably only been on hormones for a short time? How many times do transphobes have to he told that minors do not get genital surgery for you to stop pretending that that is the case? If a circumcised kid attempts suicide, should the parents be on the hook? What about a cancer survivor who went through chemo, what if they attempt suicide? What about a cis teen who got a nose job? Has it occurred to you that the kid is transitioning not because his parents want him to, but because he wants to?

Regarding the bolded bit:
I don't know if you just don't know this or are being dishonest, but assuming you don't know, there absolutely are surgerons who will preform those surgeries on minors. So his concern is legitimate.

He explicitly said he thinks hormone therapy is mutilation. The kid in question has not had surgery. You are being dishonest by pretending that surgery is relevant here.

[Libertas Vel Mors]

If in any other circumstance a child attempted suicide after their parents mutilated them, there would be an investigation at the very least. Not sure why this should be any different here.

Hormone therapy is mutilation? Even when the kid has probably only been on hormones for a short time? How many times do transphobes have to he told that minors do not get genital surgery for you to stop pretending that that is the case? If a circumcised kid attempts suicide, should the parents be on the hook? What about a cancer survivor who went through chemo, what if they attempt suicide? What about a cis teen who got a nose job?

Hormone therapy is mutilation, yes. Circumcision, cancer treatments, and nose rings are not mutilation.

Cutting off a part of a child's genitals without their consent is not mutilation, but a teenager choosing to take a hormone pill prescribed by a doctor is mutilation?

Yes.

If in any other circumstance a child attempted suicide after their parents mutilated them, there would be an investigation at the very least. Not sure why this should be any different here.

Hormone therapy is mutilation? Even when the kid has probably only been on hormones for a short time? How many times do transphobes have to he told that minors do not get genital surgery for you to stop pretending that that is the case? If a circumcised kid attempts suicide, should the parents be on the hook? What about a cancer survivor who went through chemo, what if they attempt suicide? What about a cis teen who got a nose job?

Hormone therapy is mutilation, yes. Circumcision, cancer treatments, and nose rings are not mutilation.

Does this extend to trans adults — have I mutilated myself?

As your nickname says, yes.

If in any other circumstance a child attempted suicide after their parents mutilated them, there would be an investigation at the very least. Not sure why this should be any different here.

Hormone therapy is mutilation? Even when the kid has probably only been on hormones for a short time? How many times do transphobes have to he told that minors do not get genital surgery for you to stop pretending that that is the case? If a circumcised kid attempts suicide, should the parents be on the hook? What about a cancer survivor who went through chemo, what if they attempt suicide? What about a cis teen who got a nose job?

Hormone therapy is mutilation, yes. Circumcision, cancer treatments, and nose rings are not mutilation.

Has it occurred to you that the kid is transitioning not because his parents want him to, but because he wants to?

Still mutiliation.

If in any other circumstance a child attempted suicide after their parents mutilated them, there would be an investigation at the very least. Not sure why this should be any different here.

Hormone therapy is mutilation? Even when the kid has probably only been on hormones for a short time? How many times do transphobes have to he told that minors do not get genital surgery for you to stop pretending that that is the case? If a circumcised kid attempts suicide, should the parents be on the hook? What about a cancer survivor who went through chemo, what if they attempt suicide? What about a cis teen who got a nose job?

Hormone therapy is mutilation, yes. Circumcision, cancer treatments, and nose rings are not mutilation.

And I said nose job, not nose ring. Lots of minors get nose jobs, but their parents have to consent to it legally. Is that mutilation? Should the parents be investigated if such a person attempted suicide?

The consequences are far less severe. They are not comparable

If in any other circumstance a child attempted suicide after their parents mutilated them, there would be an investigation at the very least. Not sure why this should be any different here.

Hormone therapy is mutilation? Even when the kid has probably only been on hormones for a short time? How many times do transphobes have to he told that minors do not get genital surgery for you to stop pretending that that is the case? If a circumcised kid attempts suicide, should the parents be on the hook? What about a cancer survivor who went through chemo, what if they attempt suicide? What about a cis teen who got a nose job?

Hormone therapy is mutilation, yes. Circumcision, cancer treatments, and nose rings are not mutilation.

Cutting off a part of a child's genitals without their consent is not mutilation, but a teenager choosing to take a hormone pill prescribed by a doctor is mutilation? Does this extend to trans adults — have I mutilated myself? Has it occurred to you that the kid is transitioning not because his parents want him to, but because he wants to?

And I said nose job, not nose ring. Lots of minors get nose jobs, but their parents have to consent to it legally. Is that mutilation? Should the parents be investigated if such a person attempted suicide?

And I suppose you'd argue that parents who oppose their trans children's transition, often violently, are off the hook if the trans kid attempts suicide?

Yes.

[fhtagn]

If in any other circumstance a child attempted suicide after their parents mutilated them, there would be an investigation at the very least. Not sure why this should be any different here.

Hormone therapy is mutilation? Even when the kid has probably only been on hormones for a short time? How many times do transphobes have to he told that minors do not get genital surgery for you to stop pretending that that is the case? If a circumcised kid attempts suicide, should the parents be on the hook? What about a cancer survivor who went through chemo, what if they attempt suicide? What about a cis teen who got a nose job? Has it occurred to you that the kid is transitioning not because his parents want him to, but because he wants to?

Regarding the bolded bit:
I don't know if you just don't know this or are being dishonest, but assuming you don't know, there absolutely are surgerons who will preform those surgeries on minors. So his concern is legitimate.

He explicitly said he thinks hormone therapy is mutilation. The kid in question has not had surgery. You are being dishonest by pretending that surgery is relevant here.

You are the one who mentioned surgeries...

[Klobmentum Mutilated Herself]

Does this extend to trans adults — have I mutilated myself?

As your nickname says, yes.

And I suppose you'd argue that parents who oppose their trans children's transition, often violently, are off the hook if the trans kid attempts suicide?

Yes.

Wow. On both counts. Just wow.

[Trans Rights Are Human Rights]

And I suppose you'd argue that parents who oppose their trans children's transition, often violently, are off the hook if the trans kid attempts suicide?

Yes.

Jesus ing Christ, you have no empathy. Like, I get the idea that trans people being their proper selves is a mutilation (though I disagree with it being any different than any other form of healthcare), but you've got to be one sick son of a bitch to let abusive parents off the hook.

[Libertas Vel Mors]

And I suppose you'd argue that parents who oppose their trans children's transition, often violently, are off the hook if the trans kid attempts suicide?

Yes.

Jesus ing Christ, you have no empathy. Like, I get the idea that trans people being their proper selves is a mutilation (though I disagree with it being any different than any other form of healthcare), but you've got to be one sick son of a bitch to let abusive parents off the hook.

I don't support letting abusive parents off the hook, but opposing hormone therapy isn't abuse.

[John Dule]

If in any other circumstance a child attempted suicide after their parents mutilated them, there would be an investigation at the very least. Not sure why this should be any different here.

Hormone therapy is mutilation? Even when the kid has probably only been on hormones for a short time? How many times do transphobes have to he told that minors do not get genital surgery for you to stop pretending that that is the case? If a circumcised kid attempts suicide, should the parents be on the hook? What about a cancer survivor who went through chemo, what if they attempt suicide? What about a cis teen who got a nose job?

Hormone therapy is mutilation, yes. Circumcision and cancer treatments are not mutilation. Nose rings are mutilation, but of a far lower degree than hormone therapy and are reversible without medical impact.

Credibility lost.