The transgender con ? Many transgender regret switch

originally posted by: Deaf Alien
a reply to: Sheye

That's quite a conspiracy theory involving millions of scientists and doctors.

Most of them are too swayed by the peer group and their biased studies with an agenda . Doctors deal with the issue of not being politically correct as well, and shunned by their peers , so instead cower to pushed agendas. The brave ones who refuse to accept certain theories and new studies are the ones showing healthy critical thinking , as well as enough courage to challenge the medical status quo.

originally posted by: Sheye

originally posted by: Deaf Alien
a reply to: Sheye

It's pretty hard to be biased when it's peer reviewed.

Actually its not... it could be argued that this issue of transgender has been pushed by some ( within the peer reviewed studies) and in the medical communities as a healthy alternative to gender dysphoria.

We'll just have to see what crazy train science takes us on next. Makes me want to not donate any of my body to science..I know that.

When was the last time you met a doctor that offered major surgery as a healthy alternative?

originally posted by: ReyaPhemhurth

originally posted by: Sheye

originally posted by: Deaf Alien
a reply to: Sheye

It's pretty hard to be biased when it's peer reviewed.

Actually its not... it could be argued that this issue of transgender has been pushed by some ( within the peer reviewed studies) and in the medical communities as a healthy alternative to gender dysphoria.

We'll just have to see what crazy train science takes us on next. Makes me want to not donate any of my body to science..I know that.

When was the last time you met a doctor that offered major surgery as a healthy alternative?

Are you kidding me ? They do it all the time ... and especially some for treatment of gender dysphoria.

a reply to: Sheye

They are not being pushed away. They can always submit their articles and researches for others to review. Heck you yourself can do the same.

originally posted by: Sheye

originally posted by: Deaf Alien
a reply to: Sheye

That's quite a conspiracy theory involving millions of scientists and doctors.

Most of them are too swayed by the peer group and their biased studies with an agenda . Doctors deal with the issue of not being politically correct as well, and shunned by their peers , so instead cower to pushed agendas. The brave ones who refuse to accept certain theories and new studies are the ones showing healthy critical thinking , as well as enough courage to challenge the medical status quo.

Again a purely speculative post that has no evidence of being true, at all. This is about as valid as if an author wrote a sci-fi novel where the government was made up of an alien lizard race.

Or....wait....

originally posted by: Sheye

originally posted by: ReyaPhemhurth

originally posted by: Sheye

originally posted by: Deaf Alien
a reply to: Sheye

It's pretty hard to be biased when it's peer reviewed.

Actually its not... it could be argued that this issue of transgender has been pushed by some ( within the peer reviewed studies) and in the medical communities as a healthy alternative to gender dysphoria.

We'll just have to see what crazy train science takes us on next. Makes me want to not donate any of my body to science..I know that.

When was the last time you met a doctor that offered major surgery as a healthy alternative?

Are you kidding me ? They do it all the time ... and especially some for treatment of gender dysphoria.

All the time? Really? Show me where this is being done? Outside of your own typed words and claims.

originally posted by: ReyaPhemhurth

originally posted by: Sheye

originally posted by: Deaf Alien
a reply to: Sheye

It's pretty hard to be biased when it's peer reviewed.

Actually its not... it could be argued that this issue of transgender has been pushed by some ( within the peer reviewed studies) and in the medical communities as a healthy alternative to gender dysphoria.

We'll just have to see what crazy train science takes us on next. Makes me want to not donate any of my body to science..I know that.

When was the last time you met a doctor that offered major surgery as a healthy alternative?

Doctors offer surgery often , for a variety of reasons.
I know this because I know quite a few people who have had surgery ( not transgender surgery).

a reply to: Sheye

Holy on a mo she is not condescending at all in fact you have some gall when you make an obvious hate thread and compare trans folk to pedos.
Pfft I hope for your sake there is no hell.

originally posted by: Sheye

originally posted by: ReyaPhemhurth

originally posted by: Sheye

originally posted by: Deaf Alien
a reply to: Sheye

It's pretty hard to be biased when it's peer reviewed.

Actually its not... it could be argued that this issue of transgender has been pushed by some ( within the peer reviewed studies) and in the medical communities as a healthy alternative to gender dysphoria.

We'll just have to see what crazy train science takes us on next. Makes me want to not donate any of my body to science..I know that.

When was the last time you met a doctor that offered major surgery as a healthy alternative?

Doctors offer surgery often , for a variety of reasons.
I know this because I know quite a few people who have had surgery ( not transgender surgery).

Your post is solely hearsay. Where is this being done? And I mean both for SRS or any surgery for that matter? Do you have any actual evidence that would back that statement?

originally posted by: testingtesting
a reply to: Sheye

Holy on a mo she is not condescending at all in fact you have some gall when you make an obvious hate thread and compare trans folk to pedos.
Pfft I hope for your sake there is no hell.

Thank you. I appreciate your backup. I love you, lol.

P.S. Let me know when your alter is being prepared

originally posted by: testingtesting
a reply to: Sheye

Holy on a mo she is not condescending at all in fact you have some gall when you make an obvious hate thread and compare trans folk to pedos.
Pfft I hope for your sake there is no hell.

This is exactly whats happened in this thread. People have twisted the point I was making to attack me.

My argument with the scientific studies that say they are born with a different set of chromosones, therefore it is natural to transgender, is that studies have been done with pedos as well that shows their predisposition to certain sexual attractions. If science and creation did not make a mistake with transgendered , how was there such an obvious flaw in the natural creation of a pedo ?

originally posted by: Sheye

originally posted by: testingtesting
a reply to: Sheye

Holy on a mo she is not condescending at all in fact you have some gall when you make an obvious hate thread and compare trans folk to pedos.
Pfft I hope for your sake there is no hell.

This is exactly whats happened in this thread. People have twisted the point I was making to attack me.

My argument with the scientific studies that say they are born with a different set of chromosones, therefore it is natural to transgender, is that studies have been done with pedos as well that shows their predisposition to certain sexual attractions. If science and creation did not make a mistake with transgendered , how was there such an obvious flaw in the natural creation of a pedo ?

Again, 'twisting' and semantics aside,
What you did do when you brought pedos into this thread was create a false correlation with two very unlike things. And because they were different, it became very easy to misconstrue your words..or 'twist' them, in your opinion.

Either way, though, it was a false correlation in which a valid assertion could not be drawn upon.

originally posted by: ReyaPhemhurth

originally posted by: Sheye

originally posted by: testingtesting
a reply to: Sheye

Holy on a mo she is not condescending at all in fact you have some gall when you make an obvious hate thread and compare trans folk to pedos.
Pfft I hope for your sake there is no hell.

This is exactly whats happened in this thread. People have twisted the point I was making to attack me.

My argument with the scientific studies that say they are born with a different set of chromosones, therefore it is natural to transgender, is that studies have been done with pedos as well that shows their predisposition to certain sexual attractions. If science and creation did not make a mistake with transgendered , how was there such an obvious flaw in the natural creation of a pedo ?

Again, 'twisting' and semantics aside,
What you did do when you brought pedos into this thread was create a false correlation with two very unlike things. And because they were different, it became very easy to misconstrue your words..or 'twist' them, in your opinion.

Either way, though, it was a false correlation in which a valid assertion could not be drawn upon.

A valid assertion can be drawn upon if by your scientific standards transgendered can be considered naturally born that way... yet paedophilia is considered a mental illness .

Need to go for a bit ... laterz 😁

originally posted by: Sheye

originally posted by: ReyaPhemhurth

originally posted by: Sheye

originally posted by: testingtesting
a reply to: Sheye

Holy on a mo she is not condescending at all in fact you have some gall when you make an obvious hate thread and compare trans folk to pedos.
Pfft I hope for your sake there is no hell.

This is exactly whats happened in this thread. People have twisted the point I was making to attack me.

My argument with the scientific studies that say they are born with a different set of chromosones, therefore it is natural to transgender, is that studies have been done with pedos as well that shows their predisposition to certain sexual attractions. If science and creation did not make a mistake with transgendered , how was there such an obvious flaw in the natural creation of a pedo ?

Again, 'twisting' and semantics aside,
What you did do when you brought pedos into this thread was create a false correlation with two very unlike things. And because they were different, it became very easy to misconstrue your words..or 'twist' them, in your opinion.

Either way, though, it was a false correlation in which a valid assertion could not be drawn upon.

A valid assertion can be drawn upon if by your scientific standards transgendered can be considered naturally born that way... yet paedophilia is considered a mental illness .

Need to go for a bit ... laterz 😁

That is misrepresenting the real issue that you compared two dissimilar things. Anything to do with the brain of a pedo does not have anything to do with the brain of someone who is trans. Just because a study may say one thing about the brain of a pedo, it does not mean you can apply the very same principle with certainty to the brain of someone who is trans..or for anyone else for that matter. You're connecting incorrect dots.

originally posted by: Sheye

originally posted by: ReyaPhemhurth

originally posted by: Sheye

originally posted by: testingtesting
a reply to: Sheye

Holy on a mo she is not condescending at all in fact you have some gall when you make an obvious hate thread and compare trans folk to pedos.
Pfft I hope for your sake there is no hell.

This is exactly whats happened in this thread. People have twisted the point I was making to attack me.

My argument with the scientific studies that say they are born with a different set of chromosones, therefore it is natural to transgender, is that studies have been done with pedos as well that shows their predisposition to certain sexual attractions. If science and creation did not make a mistake with transgendered , how was there such an obvious flaw in the natural creation of a pedo ?

Again, 'twisting' and semantics aside,
What you did do when you brought pedos into this thread was create a false correlation with two very unlike things. And because they were different, it became very easy to misconstrue your words..or 'twist' them, in your opinion.

Either way, though, it was a false correlation in which a valid assertion could not be drawn upon.

A valid assertion can be drawn upon if by your scientific standards transgendered can be considered naturally born that way... yet paedophilia is considered a mental illness .

Need to go for a bit ... laterz 😁

How is pedophilia any more connected to gender dysporia than a religious person who gains personal gnosis from an unidentifiable source, allowing her to dismiss any subject matter expert placed in her path.

Some would say your delusions are similar to a pedophile's. But I'd never compare the two because I respect you enough as a human not to do so.

originally posted by: Abysha

originally posted by: Sheye

originally posted by: ReyaPhemhurth

originally posted by: Sheye

originally posted by: testingtesting
a reply to: Sheye

Holy on a mo she is not condescending at all in fact you have some gall when you make an obvious hate thread and compare trans folk to pedos.
Pfft I hope for your sake there is no hell.

This is exactly whats happened in this thread. People have twisted the point I was making to attack me.

My argument with the scientific studies that say they are born with a different set of chromosones, therefore it is natural to transgender, is that studies have been done with pedos as well that shows their predisposition to certain sexual attractions. If science and creation did not make a mistake with transgendered , how was there such an obvious flaw in the natural creation of a pedo ?

Again, 'twisting' and semantics aside,
What you did do when you brought pedos into this thread was create a false correlation with two very unlike things. And because they were different, it became very easy to misconstrue your words..or 'twist' them, in your opinion.

Either way, though, it was a false correlation in which a valid assertion could not be drawn upon.

A valid assertion can be drawn upon if by your scientific standards transgendered can be considered naturally born that way... yet paedophilia is considered a mental illness .

Need to go for a bit ... laterz 😁

How is pedophilia any more connected to gender dysporia than a religious person who gains personal gnosis from an unidentifiable source, allowing her to dismiss any subject matter expert placed in her path.

Some would say your delusions are similar to a pedophile's. But I'd never compare the two because I respect you enough as a human not to do so.

This, this, a million times, this.

Perfectly put, Abysha!

originally posted by: Sheye

originally posted by: Deaf Alien
a reply to: Sheye

It's pretty hard to be biased when it's peer reviewed.

Actually its not... it could be argued that this issue of transgender has been pushed by some ( within the peer reviewed studies)

No, it can't actually. But then one would have had to have read the papers to know what they are actually saying. See, in the peer review process, you are collecting data, tabulating results, showing what tests or methodology ugh used to obtain those results and then set the paper loose for people whose greatest desire is to tear your work apart and mock you openly. If you had ever studied the sciences or worked in them professionally, you would know that when we get together in groups, it's every man for himself lol.

and in the medical communities as a healthy alternative to gender dysphoria.

So what exactly is in the peer reviewed literature that has lead you to these conclusions? I'm not trying to be mit picky, but considering that you have said in multiple threads for the last 2 weeks that you have not and would not read any peer reviewed papers and had already claimed that they were biased and dismissed them outright without having read them, it at least appears that you are simply being coy and echoing what myself and others have said about your own source material in veiled mockery.

I can assure you that I didn't make any connection rd pertaining to the legitimacy or biases of your own citations without actually having read them and engaged in my own due diligence to determine the veracity of the claims being made. It's why I was able to pick them apart with specificit. Can you do the same in return? That's not a challenge or an attempt to mock you. If you can pick apart the peer reviewed literature and show me where they are in error and why and what the biases are, I will be happy to admit I am in error if I am indeed wrong in my interpretation of the data at hand.

We'll just have to see what crazy train science takes us on next. Makes me want to not donate any of my body to science..I know that.

You do realize that "science" isn't some ominous organization where we have secret handshakes that allow us to enter members only areas of libraries where we conduct rituals to the dark lord to honor him with the blood sacrifices of the unwitting right? What you are alluding to would require an international conspiracy amongst every known scientific discipline with no member ever breaking ranks.the scope and magnitude of something like that is both unimaginable and highly implausible.

originally posted by: Sheye

originally posted by: ReyaPhemhurth

originally posted by: Sheye

originally posted by: testingtesting
a reply to: Sheye

Holy on a mo she is not condescending at all in fact you have some gall when you make an obvious hate thread and compare trans folk to pedos.
Pfft I hope for your sake there is no hell.

This is exactly whats happened in this thread. People have twisted the point I was making to attack me.

My argument with the scientific studies that say they are born with a different set of chromosones, therefore it is natural to transgender, is that studies have been done with pedos as well that shows their predisposition to certain sexual attractions. If science and creation did not make a mistake with transgendered , how was there such an obvious flaw in the natural creation of a pedo ?

Again, 'twisting' and semantics aside,
What you did do when you brought pedos into this thread was create a false correlation with two very unlike things. And because they were different, it became very easy to misconstrue your words..or 'twist' them, in your opinion.

Either way, though, it was a false correlation in which a valid assertion could not be drawn upon.

A valid assertion can be drawn upon if by your scientific standards transgendered can be considered naturally born that way... yet paedophilia is considered a mental illness .

Need to go for a bit ... laterz 😁

Again, as I said earlier, it's a false equivalency and the 2 are in no way analogous to one another. To compare a Transgendered individual to a pedophile isn't just wrong, it's incredibly demeaning, it's insulting and it's ridiculously rude. You're comparing a person who wants to be left alone to life their life in peace to a predator who purposely harms children. If you can't see the difference then I really don't know what else to say.

a reply to: peter vlar

I quote...
"You do realize that "science" isn't some ominous organization where we have secret handshakes that allow us to enter members only areas of libraries where we conduct rituals to the dark lord to honor him with the blood sacrifices of the unwitting right?"


But we could do Peter you and me Baby we could do all that and more for all time 100 years of Testing and Peter! we could rule the earth and make it shudder with the dark side of science.
Mahahaha Mahahahahahhahahaa (evil laugh to fade).
.

originally posted by: peter vlar

originally posted by: Sheye

originally posted by: Deaf Alien
a reply to: Sheye

It's pretty hard to be biased when it's peer reviewed.

Actually its not... it could be argued that this issue of transgender has been pushed by some ( within the peer reviewed studies)

No, it can't actually. But then one would have had to have read the papers to know what they are actually saying. See, in the peer review process, you are collecting data, tabulating results, showing what tests or methodology ugh used to obtain those results and then set the paper loose for people whose greatest desire is to tear your work apart and mock you openly. If you had ever studied the sciences or worked in them professionally, you would know that when we get together in groups, it's every man for himself lol.

and in the medical communities as a healthy alternative to gender dysphoria.

So what exactly is in the peer reviewed literature that has lead you to these conclusions? I'm not trying to be mit picky, but considering that you have said in multiple threads for the last 2 weeks that you have not and would not read any peer reviewed papers and had already claimed that they were biased and dismissed them outright without having read them, it at least appears that you are simply being coy and echoing what myself and others have said about your own source material in veiled mockery.

I can assure you that I didn't make any connection rd pertaining to the legitimacy or biases of your own citations without actually having read them and engaged in my own due diligence to determine the veracity of the claims being made. It's why I was able to pick them apart with specificit. Can you do the same in return? That's not a challenge or an attempt to mock you. If you can pick apart the peer reviewed literature and show me where they are in error and why and what the biases are, I will be happy to admit I am in error if I am indeed wrong in my interpretation of the data at hand.

We'll just have to see what crazy train science takes us on next. Makes me want to not donate any of my body to science..I know that.

You do realize that "science" isn't some ominous organization where we have secret handshakes that allow us to enter members only areas of libraries where we conduct rituals to the dark lord to honor him with the blood sacrifices of the unwitting right? What you are alluding to would require an international conspiracy amongst every known scientific discipline with no member ever breaking ranks.the scope and magnitude of something like that is both unimaginable and highly implausible.

I sincerely hope Sheye replies to your post with some actual honesty and contemplation. Because...I sincerely feel this is everything I have been saying as well (except not as beautifully and on point as you, of course ) but differently and my points and my legitimate questions keep getting ignored a million different ways.

I, like you, really want to have an honest discussion with OP. And again, like you said, if the studies found in the 10 peer-reviewed studies I posted a few pages ago (I actually counted 10 of them) were found to be wrong in a manner besides merely Sheye labeling them as such just because she feels like it...I too would be happy to admit I was erroneous. But...for some reason, I keep getting called condescending and I keep getting ignored.

So, I sincerely hope she replies to you without the coyness.

P.S. I dropped you a happy little line or two in your inbox, ha. I'm happy you're still around, lol.