Chicago Public Schools Now Forcing Students To Use Requested Transgender Pronouns

a reply to: new_here

Not understanding what you mean? The doctors and psychiatrists already are working with them so that means they are using tools to determine. Maybe you can explain a little better? If you are talking in general that they proved that some children are truly transgender using brain scans that I can provide you with that.

originally posted by: Deaf Alien
a reply to: new_here

Not understanding what you mean? The doctors and psychiatrists already are working with them so that means they are using tools to determine. Maybe you can explain a little better? If you are talking in general that they proved that some children are truly transgender using brain scans that I can provide you with that.

They are not using brain scans and you know it. If brain scans prove trans, which you have said, then why are they not using them?

a reply to: new_here

I'll have to let someone else answer your questions but in the meanwhile you can start with this article:

www.scientificamerican.com...

This covers in part your question.

a reply to: new_here

Divert? Hellow Ms. Kettle. I didn't say anything about brain scans being used as diagnostic criteria did I? Nice strawman.

Er. Strawperson.

However, it's very low-hanging Google fruit, if you're really interested in the science behind it.

But, let's be real, you're not interested in the facts of the matter, or else you wouldn't be attempting to make the claim that gender identity is totally "subjective" in nature and is therefore, as you said before ... bull****.

News flash: any sort of identity is subjective. We are what we perceive/believe/conceive ourselves to be as "personae"

Surely, for those folks that identify themselves as religious ... you're not suggesting that since there is ZERO objective proof of the existence of gods/etc. that they shouldn't have religious freedom and associated rights ...

... are you??? Because, after all, that's all just SUBJECTIVE ...

originally posted by: queenofswords
a reply to: Deaf Alien

Hard science such as what can be found in brain scans would be more definitive than pseudo "studies" based on feelings.

As she said in her last sentence above:

Could it be that you really know the brain scan thing is bull#?

So how about you Queen ... are you willing to use the same criteria you're trying to slam onto trans* kids?

Can you objectively prove your religious or political beliefs based on a brain scan? Can you prove that you love your family with an MRI?

If not ...

a reply to: Gryphon66

I didn't say anything about brain scans being used as diagnostic criteria did I? Nice strawman.

No you didn't, and that's the problem. You replied to my post to DeafAlien in which I asked why brain scans are not used as diagnostic tools, yet neither you nor he have an answer to that question. That's pretty telling.

originally posted by: Gryphon66
Divert? Hellow Ms. Kettle. I didn't say anything about brain scans being used as diagnostic criteria did I? Nice strawman.

She didn't say that you did. She is just making a valid point which nobody seems able to refute using sound reasoning. Nice false "straw man card" you used there...

However, it's very low-hanging Google fruit, if you're really interested in the science behind it.

If you can demonstrate that there is a scientific basis to transgerism then I am all ears...but as the other poster has suggested, it all appears to be subjective.

But, let's be real, you're not interested in the facts of the matter, or else you wouldn't be attempting to make the claim that gender identity is totally "subjective" in nature and is therefore, as you said before ... bull****.

After reading her posts, I feel you are unfairly grouping her with others who might be doing those things.

News flash: any sort of identity is subjective. We are what we perceive/believe/conceive ourselves to be as "personae"

Agreed. But when identifying somebody in a legal context, identity is not subjective and it ought not be if we are to function as a society.

Surely, for those folks that identify themselves as religious ... you're not suggesting that since there is ZERO objective proof of the existence of gods/etc. that they shouldn't have religious freedom and associated rights ...

... are you??? Because, after all, that's all just SUBJECTIVE ...

You are comparing apples and oranges. But, just to clarify, I agree that children should NOT be forced into religious beliefs. The decision should be made by themselves in time when they have developed some life experience.

originally posted by: xuenchen
a reply to: 3NL1GHT3N3D1

You know what the blistering irony is don't you?

The school systems stress education, yet the Obama Administration is stressing compliance and punishment before education.

Who are the crazy ones now?

In an upside down crazy culture like ours, where anything goes
and nothing but the untruth is provable fact intead of truth, X.
Specifically, after three generations of communist change agents
(unwitting or willing brainwashers) doing each other, you get this.
Our public school system is the biggest threat to this country since
really rich people took over the intelligence agencies.

a reply to: new_here

yet neither you nor he have an answer to that question. That's pretty telling.

Whoa be careful. I did answer your question and I even posted a link to an article. But I told you that I would let someone else that are more expert than me answer your questions. Did you read that article BTW?

originally posted by: new_here
a reply to: Gryphon66

I didn't say anything about brain scans being used as diagnostic criteria did I? Nice strawman.

No you didn't, and that's the problem. You replied to my post to DeafAlien in which I asked why brain scans are not used as diagnostic tools, yet neither you nor he have an answer to that question. That's pretty telling.

Pretty telling that you're wildly trying to force a claim that no one here in this discussion has made.

Are you that surprised that we know a loaded question when we see it?

So, why don't you pony up some facts then? Can you prove any part of your subjective experience with a brain scan?

Love, faith, feelings, sense of self ... anything?

If not, I submit you know the answer to your own hypocritical question.

originally posted by: Gryphon66

originally posted by: queenofswords
a reply to: Deaf Alien

Hard science such as what can be found in brain scans would be more definitive than pseudo "studies" based on feelings.

As she said in her last sentence above:

Could it be that you really know the brain scan thing is bull#?

So how about you Queen ... are you willing to use the same criteria you're trying to slam onto trans* kids?

Can you objectively prove your religious or political beliefs based on a brain scan? Can you prove that you love your family with an MRI?

If not ...

Oh come on... the lengths you people will go to to avoid answering the question. No one has claimed any of that can be detected on a brain scan. It's tossed around as fact that trans can be detected, however. Gimme a break. You just made your case look ridiculous, as though detecting trans on a scan is as doable as detecting political beliefs.

a reply to: new_here

Have you even read that article I linked you? That article is an introduction to very very basic topic.

originally posted by: Gryphon66

originally posted by: new_here
a reply to: Gryphon66

I didn't say anything about brain scans being used as diagnostic criteria did I? Nice strawman.

No you didn't, and that's the problem. You replied to my post to DeafAlien in which I asked why brain scans are not used as diagnostic tools, yet neither you nor he have an answer to that question. That's pretty telling.

Pretty telling that you're wildly trying to force a claim that no one here in this discussion has made.

Deaf Alien said:

Children with "male" or "female" brains will consistently "identify" with their genders. Many evidence point to that. Brain scans and genetic researches for example.

a reply to: new_here

Yes. So you read the article?

No idea why new_here has been ignoring my posts from like 10 posts ago.

originally posted by: Deaf Alien
a reply to: new_here

Have you even read that article I linked you? That article is an introduction to very very basic topic.

I want to know why the technology is not being used for diagnosis, since you have claimed it as proof of trans. I'm not interested in studying the development of the procedure.

a reply to: Dark Ghost

LOL ... didn't notice you tagging up there ...

There is no valid point in the claim that anyone here has made any claim about the diagnostic value of a "brain scan" in verifying that someone's gender identity is trans*. Because a) no one has made that claim and b) the sense of identity is not limited only to brain structure.

Did you Google "transgender brain scans"? That might be a place to start looking, if you truly are interested.

You feel like I'm inaccurately grouping "her"? With whom? I have made a comment about "her" statements, and she was pretty clear in her statement that trans* identities are bull**** ... why don't you start from there in your defense?

You want to talk about the intricacies of updating our legal system to acknowledge the realities of trans* individuals? Good deal ... that's a needful discussion ... but that's not what's being discussed here. The implication is that since classifying gender identity is mostly limited (at this point in time) to subjective measures, it's more a matter of the "imaginary" rather than the "personal" side of subjectivity.

Really? I'm comparing apples and oranges? If we're talking about the subjective conceptions of ourselves (not to mention what the nature of truth is) are you implying that religious and political beliefs, emotions, et. al. are OBJECTIVE?

I'd love to see your proof of that one.

originally posted by: Deaf Alien
a reply to: new_here

Yes. So you read the article?

Quit tugging on my shirt and asking me that question. Learn some patience. You aren't the only person in my life right now.

a reply to: new_here

FINALLY!!! You replied to me!

Overall the weight of these studies and others points strongly toward a biological basis for gender dysphoria. But given the variety of transgender people and the variation in the brains of men and women generally, it will be a long time, if ever, before a doctor can do a brain scan on a child and say, “Yes, this child is trans.”

There are other criteria. Why do you think the doctors and psychiatrists work with them? And why do you think they don't do MRIs? Ok I've said I'll let others reply for me. Sorry. I'll stay quiet.

originally posted by: Deaf Alien
The doctors and psychiatrists already are working with them so that means they are using tools to determine.

Human's are Black and White, ya know.

Just stick them in a machine and VOILA!! All your scientific data dreams come true.

Brain scans are a fairly new science. Even though much has been discovered, its still newish.

Here's an article from 2012 about detecting Autism with brain scans. Have you heard anything about this being put into practical service? Me either.

AUTISM Brain Imaging Could Detect Autism Risk in Infants as Young as 6 Months Early intervention may help curb some of the more severe symptoms of autism. The question is, How do we identify at-risk children early enough? healthland.time.com...