RE: Girl Scout troops disband over admittance of transgender child

RE: Girl Scout troops disband over admittance of transgender child (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid

Message

tazzygirl -> RE: Girl Scout troops disband over admittance of transgender child (12/23/2011 2:41:10 PM)
quote: someone's daughter came back pregnant Someone needs a biology course.

tweakabelle -> RE: Girl Scout troops disband over admittance of transgender child (12/23/2011 2:47:17 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Anyone who purports their are no gender differences when study after study show that many preferences/aptitudes are gender related is just trying to deny biology. What else do you expect from someone who thinks that sperm have less rights than eggs. AFAIK, despite thousands of research attempts to prove the claims asserted above as facts, only a tiny number of have shown differences in preferences/aptitudes that co-relate with biological differences. This 'tiny number' refers to a few studies that have shown minor differences in spatial awareness between boys and girls. All other attempts to establish a biological basis for differences in behaviour have failed. For instance no one has ever been able to demonstrate a causal relationship between testosterone and aggression, despite hundreds of research projects attempting to establish such a relationship. Willbur's assertion flies in the face of the facts (nothing new there is there?). Of course, if people wish to assert that "study after study show that many preferences/aptitudes are gender related", they should have no problem citing this research. The only research I know of that can support this claim attributes the differences unequivocally to social factors not "biology". That is to say such differences in behaviours that have been established are created by other humans, by culture and therefore not given in nature or biology. One direct implication of this is there is no 'gendered' behaviour that is unchangeable. If people wish to examine this topic further, Professor of Biology and Gender Studies at Brown University, Anne Fausto-Sterling examines the evidence definitively in her book 'Myths of Gender' and other writings on this subject. There is also a discussion of the evidence on another thread here "where does gender come from'. The gap between everyday assumptions and the evidence in this area is monumental, (as willbur's post demonstrates) so I do urge people interested in this subject to examine the evidence and acquaint themselves with such facts as the evidence has established to date.

BanthaSamantha -> RE: Girl Scout troops disband over admittance of transgender child (12/23/2011 3:47:45 PM)
I don't see any inherent problem in the Boyscouts or Girlscouts limiting applicants to the appropriate sex. The Supreme Court has acknowledged that different treatment of different sexes can be permissible. For instance, while whites-only bathrooms are impermissible, men-only bathrooms are perfectly fine. Secondly, I would expect that both the Boyscouts and the Girlscouts would make every action possible to accommodate those children with ambiguous sex. The issue with little Bobby Montoya is that his sex isn't ambiguous. He clearly and unambiguously belongs to the male sex. Assuming such sex segregation is constitutionally permissible, I have no problem in the Girlscouts restricting his membership. That said, I also would have no problem if the Girlscouts decided to take a more open and permissive approach and allowed him into the fold.

Kaliko -> RE: Girl Scout troops disband over admittance of transgender child (12/23/2011 3:50:04 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: BanthaSamantha I don't see any inherent problem in the Boyscouts or Girlscouts limiting applicants to the appropriate sex. The Supreme Court has acknowledged that different treatment of different sexes can be permissible. For instance, while whites-only bathrooms are impermissible, men-only bathrooms are perfectly fine. Secondly, I would expect that both the Boyscouts and the Girlscouts would make every action possible to accommodate those children with ambiguous sex. The issue with little Bobby Montoya is that his sex isn't ambiguous. He clearly and unambiguously belongs to the male sex. Assuming such sex segregation is constitutionally permissible, I have no problem in the Girlscouts restricting his membership. That said, I also would have no problem if the Girlscouts decided to take a more open and permissive approach and allowed him into the fold. Girl Scouts did allow it, didn't they? I believe it was just certain troop leaders that disbanded their troops as a result.

tazzygirl -> RE: Girl Scout troops disband over admittance of transgender child (12/23/2011 4:16:26 PM)
You are right, Kaliko

BanthaSamantha -> RE: Girl Scout troops disband over admittance of transgender child (12/23/2011 4:21:05 PM)
Yeah that's right. The behavior and words of those troop leaders were particularly odious.

InvisibleBlack -> RE: Girl Scout troops disband over admittance of transgender child (12/23/2011 4:46:40 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: tazzygirl quote: someone's daughter came back pregnant Someone needs a biology course. So you're telling me that it would be impossible for Bobby Montoya or someone else transgendered like her, eight or ten years from now, to impregnate a girl? Oddly enough, I knew a couple in their 20s where one partner was M-t-F transgendered sans hormones and managed to impregnate her girlfriend. Your explanation for this wouldn't be that she had a fully functioning penis?

tazzygirl -> RE: Girl Scout troops disband over admittance of transgender child (12/23/2011 5:10:56 PM)
You were speaking past tense. How do you know she didnt get pregnant before leaving for camp?

InvisibleBlack -> RE: Girl Scout troops disband over admittance of transgender child (12/23/2011 5:14:39 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: tazzygirl You were speaking past tense. How do you know she didnt get pregnant before leaving for camp? Now you're being deliberately obtuse.

tazzygirl -> RE: Girl Scout troops disband over admittance of transgender child (12/23/2011 5:17:28 PM)
How so? You asked what I meant, and I told you. You seem to want to insist that this would happen between this child and another girl in their teens. Yet, to do so, you would have to predict that she (Bobby) will be gay or bisexual... something you surely cannot do at this point. You would also have to predict that this girl did not get pregnant before going... again, something you surely cannot do. So, whiles its possible, the ability to say its probable just isnt there.

willbeurdaddy -> RE: Girl Scout troops disband over admittance of transgender child (12/23/2011 5:23:24 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: InvisibleBlack quote: ORIGINAL: tazzygirl You were speaking past tense. How do you know she didnt get pregnant before leaving for camp? Now you're being deliberately obtuse. Next she'll claim it was an immaculate conception.

MasterSlaveLA -> RE: Girl Scout troops disband over admittance of transgender child (12/23/2011 5:44:28 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Iamsemisweet Girl Scout troops disband over admittance of transgender child I'd have yanked my kid as well... for the SAME reason (i) I wouldn't want my kid exposed to a transgendered Scout Leader (or School Teacher, or whatever), and/or (ii) our BDSM proclivities are not exposed to lil' ones. It's not my or any parent's responsibility to expose their lil' ones to, or have to explain to them why, little Bobby puts on a dress because he thinks/feels he's little Barbie. Kids have a LIFETIME of these sorts of things that they'll ultimately be exposed to (ideally when they're mature enough to understand them), and my preference is to let them JUST BE KIDS while they can, and for as long as they can -- without forcing them to contend with issues of a financial, sexual, political, criminal, or whatever nature. They're kids... and every parent has the right let them be "kids", if they so choose -- despite what the PC Police may think.

InvisibleBlack -> RE: Girl Scout troops disband over admittance of transgender child (12/23/2011 5:47:21 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: tazzygirl How so? You asked what I meant, and I told you. You seem to want to insist that this would happen between this child and another girl in their teens. Yet, to do so, you would have to predict that she (Bobby) will be gay or bisexual... something you surely cannot do at this point. You would also have to predict that this girl did not get pregnant before going... again, something you surely cannot do. So, whiles its possible, the ability to say its probable just isnt there. I said nothing about Bobby Montoya. The girl is 7. GotSteel said quote: I also propose that the reason for the lack of co-ed in these organizations isn't really because of girls and boys being into different things but out of fear that the haha is going to end up in the hoohoo. I agreed. A concern of the GSA has to be allowing fully functioning males into the Girl Scouts. Pregnancy resulting from one or more trips and/or events (and the potential lawsuits) would be an ongoing risk. Any time you put a batch of male and female teenagers together in an un- or semi-supervised state for an extended period of time (and unless things have changed radically from my experience in the Scouts, supervision is in no way up to chaperone status) you're risking "the haha ending up in the hoohoo", to use GotSteel's description. Your dismissive response was that I didn't understand biology. I believe you are now stepping back from that position. Your next comment was: quote: ORIGINAL: tazzygirl You were speaking past tense. How do you know she didnt get pregnant before leaving for camp? Which is attempting to quantify an abstract situation (allowing funtional teenage males on "sleepovers" with teenage girls in the outdoors) to a single hypothetical anecdotal situation, and then to propose alternative arguments for it (i.e. the hypothetical pregnancy could have occured elsewhere). I assume you took my point and rather than address it (as in - there could be additional supervising, added counseling for troops with transgender members, etc.) are looking to avoid the issue. I have no doubt that Girl Scouts get pregnant outside of Girl Scout activities. That is irrelevant. You seem to imply I'm saying something about Bobby Montoya. I'm not. I don't know enough about Bobby to have an opinion on her life or character. I wish her all of the best and I'm sorry she was treated poorly by some of the Girl Scout leaders. To reiterate - I'm saying the GSA would likely be concerned that despite being transgendered, the potential would exist for sexual relations between Girl Scouts. The ultimate issue would be pregnancy. If we're discussing probabilities - right now there's no way to tell. There aren't any statistics on M-t-F transgendered teenagers having sex with other girls (at least that I'm aware of). Given the sex drive of most teenagers and the fact that no transgendered teen is probably going to be allowed to take hormones or treatments, I'd expect it does happen. If you're going to be a responsible scoutmaster (is that what they call it in the Girl Scouts?) of a troop in their mid-teens and you had a transgendered girl in your troop, you'd have to consider it. I would argue you'd be remiss if you didn't. Your argument seems to be that it couldn't happen and that if it did, there would have to be some other explanation. Am I misstating it?

BanthaSamantha -> RE: Girl Scout troops disband over admittance of transgender child (12/23/2011 5:55:41 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: MasterSlaveLA I'd have yanked my kid as well... for the SAME reason (i) I wouldn't want my kid exposed to a transgendered Scout Leader (or School Teacher, or whatever), and/or (ii) our BDSM proclivities are not exposed to lil' ones. Kids have a LIFETIME of these sorts of things that they'll ultimately be exposed to (ideally when they're mature enough to understand them), and my preference is to let them JUST BE KIDS while they can, and for as long as they can -- without forcing them to contend with issues of a financial, sexual, political, criminal, or whatever nature. They're kids... and every parent has the right let them be "kids", if they so choose -- despite what the PC Police may think. This logic extends to virtually anything that is difficult/taxing/awkward to explain to your child. A Jewish teacher with a code tattoed on his wrist is just as difficult to explain to a child as a transgendered teacher. Surely the Holocaust would be just as sensitive and mature a topic to discuss with your children as transgenderism is. Even a teacher that doesn't believe in Santa Claus is sure to inspire some uncomfortable questions in your child. It is admirable that you'd want to protect your children from the knowledge that the world is a unusual and often cruel place, but should the rest of us have any responsibility to help you maintain that illusion?

tazzygirl -> RE: Girl Scout troops disband over admittance of transgender child (12/23/2011 6:05:27 PM)
quote: So you're telling me that it would be impossible for Bobby Montoya or someone else transgendered like her, eight or ten years from now, to impregnate a girl? You didnt say anything about Bobby? Are you sure? I could have sworn those were your words, post # 67, no?

MasterSlaveLA -> RE: Girl Scout troops disband over admittance of transgender child (12/23/2011 6:07:24 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: BanthaSamantha ...should the rest of us have any responsibility to help you maintain that illusion? Too bad your empty little rant is sensless in the extreme. Not exposing my lil one(s) to a male that desires to wear a dress places ZERO "responsibility" on YOU -- neat how that works, huh?!! That you think YOU have any "responsibility" for MY decisions for MY lil' one(s) is YOUR grand "illusion". In the future, if you're going post something concerning another's decisions for THEIR family, first ensure it makes SOME sense. [8\|]

tazzygirl -> RE: Girl Scout troops disband over admittance of transgender child (12/23/2011 6:07:55 PM)
quote: Your argument seems to be that it couldn't happen and that if it did, there would have to be some other explanation. Am I misstating it? Yes, you are. My position is that at age 7, its not a position to be concerned about, and that by the time Bobby is, say 14? they would have 7 years to decide how to handle such a situation. Beyond that, we have no ability to know what could or couldnt happen. Possible yes... probable, we dont know.

InvisibleBlack -> RE: Girl Scout troops disband over admittance of transgender child (12/23/2011 6:10:07 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: BanthaSamantha It is admirable that you'd want to protect your children from the knowledge that the world is a unusual and often cruel place, but should the rest of us have any responsibility to help you maintain that illusion? I would agree with you that society has no obligation to conform to any individual's choice in child-rearing or when to expose a child to any particular piece of information ... but, conversely, if a group of parents want to create an environment where their children can interact without exposure to something - do they have the right to create that environment? And if so, how far does that right extend? Where do you draw the line? If a bunch of parents want to start up their own private self-funded daycare/scouting/private school whatever and they want to exclude certain things ... can they? How far should that go? No transgendered teachers at private school? No holocaust survivors at private school? No Santa-deniers at private school?

tazzygirl -> RE: Girl Scout troops disband over admittance of transgender child (12/23/2011 6:11:01 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: MasterSlaveLA quote: ORIGINAL: Iamsemisweet Girl Scout troops disband over admittance of transgender child I'd have yanked my kid as well... for the SAME reason (i) I wouldn't want my kid exposed to a transgendered Scout Leader (or School Teacher, or whatever), and/or (ii) our BDSM proclivities are not exposed to lil' ones. It's not my or any parent's responsibility to expose their lil' ones to, or have to explain to them why, little Bobby puts on a dress because he thinks/feels he's little Barbie. Kids have a LIFETIME of these sorts of things that they'll ultimately be exposed to (ideally when they're mature enough to understand them), and my preference is to let them JUST BE KIDS while they can, and for as long as they can -- without forcing them to contend with issues of a financial, sexual, political, criminal, or whatever nature. They're kids... and every parent has the right let them be "kids", if they so choose -- despite what the PC Police may think. But its not an adult that is the transgender in this case.

MasterSlaveLA -> RE: Girl Scout troops disband over admittance of transgender child (12/23/2011 6:17:28 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: tazzygirl quote: ORIGINAL: MasterSlaveLA quote: ORIGINAL: Iamsemisweet Girl Scout troops disband over admittance of transgender child I'd have yanked my kid as well... for the SAME reason (i) I wouldn't want my kid exposed to a transgendered Scout Leader (or School Teacher, or whatever), and/or (ii) our BDSM proclivities are not exposed to lil' ones. It's not my or any parent's responsibility to expose their lil' ones to, or have to explain to them why, little Bobby puts on a dress because he thinks/feels he's little Barbie. Kids have a LIFETIME of these sorts of things that they'll ultimately be exposed to (ideally when they're mature enough to understand them), and my preference is to let them JUST BE KIDS while they can, and for as long as they can -- without forcing them to contend with issues of a financial, sexual, political, criminal, or whatever nature. They're kids... and every parent has the right let them be "kids", if they so choose -- despite what the PC Police may think. But its not an adult that is the transgender in this case. Again, "It's not my or any parent's responsibility to expose their lil' ones to, or have to explain to them why, little Bobby puts on a dress because he thinks/feels he's little Barbie." Bobby/Barbie's age is irrelevant.

Page: << < prev 2 3 [4] 5 6 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2024

Terms of Service

0.0234375