Log In
Register
4.32pm
26 January 2017
Offline
*sees this thread and reads the recent posts*
*clicks ‘add reply’*
*realises I have nothing to add to this conversation*
*moves on with day*
Self Help With QuarryMan
The following people thank QuarryMan for this post:
The Hole Got FixedI've been up on the mountain, and I've seen his wondrous grace,
I've sat there on the barstool and I've looked him in the face.
He seemed a little haggard, but it did not slow him down,
he was humming to the neon of the universal sound.
5.02pm
Reviewers
Moderators
1 May 2011
Offline 
Returning to the Penny Lane talk, the street signs have been defaced.
QuarryMan said
*sees this thread and reads the recent posts**clicks ‘add reply’*
*realises I have nothing to add to this conversation*
*moves on with day*
Self Help With QuarryMan
I’ve learned it’s better to just stay quiet than get involved in the discussions as it inevitably leads to arguments and heated discussions that are way beyond my willingness to get involved in. I’m not one who is willing to go hunting for 8 billion sources to back up my thoughts and opinions and go round in circles arguing the toss to get nowhere.
The following people thank meanmistermustard for this post:
The Hole Got Fixed, QuarryMan"I told you everything I could about me, Told you everything I could" ('Before Believing' - Emmylou Harris)
5.26pm
9 March 2017
Offline Pablo Ramon said
Well that may be your issue with Trump. Mine is that he’s a short-fingered, incompetent, ignorant, self-obsessed malignant narcissist. But I suppose that’s a subject for a different thread…
I 100% agree with you on that, Trump’s a hyper authoritarian narcissist that regularly buys into conspiracy theories.
My problem is that many of Trump’s critics act like as if he’s pure evil and super unique when in actuality, a lot of the things he’s done are just continuations of Obama-era policies, many of which are continuations of Bush-era policies and so on.
meanmistermustard said
Returning to the Penny Lane talk, the street signs have been defaced.
That’s just sad. When people think of Penny Lane , at least 99% of the world’s population think about The Beatles song and considering how strongly they were opposed to racism, it almost gives off the opposite message.
The following people thank Dark Overlord for this post:
CakeMaestorIf you're reading this, you are looking for something to do.
6.44pm
14 December 2009
Offline
Dark Overlord, your constant both-sides-isms regarding Trump/Obama are especially absurd, considering how 45’s tried to reverse every Obama initiative he can, from sheer jealousy and spite, including a new one just today.
The following people thank Von Bontee for this post:
The Hole Got Fixed, Dark Overlord, Dark OverlordPaul: Yeah well… first of all, we’re bringing out a ‘Stamp Out Detroit’ campaign.
11.22pm
9 March 2017
Offline I’m an independent who hates both parties equally (not to be confused with someone like Ross Perot who’s halfway between the two), as i see both the RNC and DNC as corrupt right wing authoritarian neoconservatives.
In this case, i side with Trump. While i don’t think either should be illegal, no one should be forced to do anything they morally object to, nor should taxpayers pay for these kinds of controversial procedures.
If you're reading this, you are looking for something to do.
8.21am
Reviewers
17 December 2012
Offline
I’m sure you’ve read it, @Dark Overlord, but for those who haven’t, here’s the top line of the link @vonbontee pointed you to:
In a move applauded by President Donald Trump’s conservative religious base, his administration on Friday finalized a rule that overturns Obama-era protections for transgender people against sex discrimination in health care.
The Department of Health and Human Services said it will enforce sex discrimination protections “according to the plain meaning of the word ‘sex’ as male or female and as determined by biology.” This rewrites an Obama-era regulation that sought a broader understanding shaped by a person’s internal sense of being male, female, neither or a combination.
LGBTQ groups say explicit protections are needed for people seeking sex-reassignment treatment, and even for transgender people who need care for common illnesses such as diabetes or heart problems.
You stated in response:
In this case, i side with Trump. While i don’t think either should be illegal, no one should be forced to do anything they morally object to, nor should taxpayers pay for these kinds of controversial procedures.
First, let’s knock on the head your second point about taxpayers money; this removal of protections applies to the whole of the health system in America, not just the publicly funded part but also if you have private health insurance; though it being government policy that it’s fine to discriminate is bad enough in itself even if it did only apply to publicly funded healthcare.
Now, let’s get to the biggie, “no one should be forced to do anything they morally object to”. More-or-less every anti-discrimination measure that has ever been brought in by governments around the world has been because parts of their population had a moral objection to treating those in a minority group equally as their morals tell them that we are not all created equal, and sometimes law is needed to support and protect those minorities.
There are those in your country who morally object to treating your citizens of different ethnic backgrounds or nationalities as equals because they do not believe they are – a point made all too clear by recent events, over 50 years after the 1965 Civil Rights Act, which was an anti-discrimination law.
There are those in your country, mainly men but also a surprising amount of women, who do not believe in equality in the workplace because they believe a woman’s ambition should be to be a homemaker, hence the 1963 Equal Pay Act, an anti-discrimination law, and various other sex discrimination laws.
There are those in your country who believe gay men and lesbians are sexual deviants and perverted and, rather than increasingly being given marriage rights, should be jailed to protect “normal people” from their perversions. Your country only reached where it is now with legalisation followed by many anti-discrimination laws.
There are many other examples that could be given.
So, you see, while still there is obviously a long way to go in all these areas (and not just in the US, I’d include the UK and most other countries), anti-discrimination laws have been needed all along the way to get us where we are now; not a good place, especially on race, but a bit better in some cases, and a lot better in others.
But you approve of Trump’s discrimination against the transgender community, and even though it is a medically identified condition, gender dysphoria, you’ve decided it’s fine for your government to discriminate against them (by withdrawing legal protections for them that is what is being done).
All should be assured their government will protect their rights to be treated as equal under the law, even should that mean additional laws are needed to ensure that their rights are protected. A government that withdraws legal protections from its weakest minorities, which the transgender community generally is the weakest in most countries, to appeal to its electoral base, is a government that says no minority is safe if it gets them votes.
So, which minority do you want to be the next to have its rights rolled back?
The following people thank Ron Nasty for this post:
Dark Overlord, QuarryMan, The Hole Got Fixed, WeepingAtlasCedars, alittlebitolder, lovelyritametermaid"I only said we were bigger than Rod... and now there's all this!" Ron Nasty
To @ Ron Nasty it's @ mja6758
The Beatles Bible 2020 non-Canon Poll Part One: 1958-1963 and Part Two: 1964-August 1966
2.16pm
9 March 2017
Offline I should’ve been more specific. When i say that no one should be forced to do things they’re morally opposed to, i meant within reason.
While i’m perfectly fine with the government mandating equality for things like gender, race, and disability where it’s completely beyond the person’s control, as well as forcing doctors to perform necessary operations on anyone*, abortions (when the mother’s life isn’t in danger) and sex changes are neither.
I also noticed that later in your post, you lump together being trans and suffering from gender dysphoria, a mental illness. However, gender dysphoria only refers to extreme cases where a person suffers from clinically significant distress or impairment.
*If this is what Trump went, then i agree with you about transgender protections. However, i don’t think this is what Trump meant, as next to no one would refuse to perform a necessary operation on someone because they’re transgender (even religious fundamentalists).
If you're reading this, you are looking for something to do.
3.38pm
Reviewers
17 December 2012
Offline As of May 2019, @Dark Overlord, gender dysphoria is no longer classified as a mental illness.
A World Health Organization expert said it now understands transgender is “not actually a mental health condition”.
Diagnosing it as a mental health condition is now considered an “outdated diagnosis” and it has been moved from “mental and behavioural disorders” to “sexual health”.
Dr Lale Say, a reproductive health expert at the World Health Organization, said: “It was taken out from mental health disorders because we had a better understanding that this was not actually a mental health condition, and leaving it there was causing stigma.
“So in order to reduce the stigma, while also ensuring access to necessary health interventions*, this was placed in a different chapter.”
So, as I said, it is a medical – or to be more precise – genetic condition, you’re born feeling you’re in the wrong body. While some people that aren’t born gay or lesbian may experiment with same-sex relationships and then decide that’s not for them, or that variety is the spice of life and they’re bi, the transgender community are completely different, they want their body changed, and Trump’s action has denied them access to the treatments they need without the fear of discrimination, and it’s far from the first act of discrimination he has instigated against the transgender community because it appeals to his base.
You can experiment with sexuality, not so much with wanting your gender changed.
* sex changes
The following people thank Ron Nasty for this post:
QuarryMan, The Hole Got Fixed, WeepingAtlasCedars, alittlebitolder"I only said we were bigger than Rod... and now there's all this!" Ron Nasty
To @ Ron Nasty it's @ mja6758
The Beatles Bible 2020 non-Canon Poll Part One: 1958-1963 and Part Two: 1964-August 1966
5.46pm
26 January 2017
Offline The UK government is dropping a part of the upcoming Gender Recognition Act (the Act was originally passed in 2004, and is expected to be updated sometime in July) which would have allowed individuals to change their legal gender according to how they self-identify. This is a huge disappointment – the 2004 GRA is now seriously out of date with current scientific consensus on the matter, as it currently still requires that individuals submit evidence of their experiencing gender dysphoria to a gender recognition panel. This is a time-consuming, mostly pointless, and humiliating experience for trans people to go through, and the government choosing to scrap plans to change it despite a majority of the public supporting the law shows that they are determined to fan the fires of their culture war rather than listen to reason and evidence.
They are also banning ‘gay cure’ therapies, though, so that’s neat
I've been up on the mountain, and I've seen his wondrous grace,
I've sat there on the barstool and I've looked him in the face.
He seemed a little haggard, but it did not slow him down,
he was humming to the neon of the universal sound.
5.55pm
9 March 2017
Offline When i say necessary operation, i mean something like open heart surgery where the patient can die if the operation isn’t performed.
A trans person won’t die if they don’t get a sex change, nor will a woman if they don’t get an abortion (at least ~99.9% of the time).
If you're reading this, you are looking for something to do.
1.54am
Reviewers
17 December 2012
Offline Much of the medical profession, @Dark Overlord, would consider gender reassignment a necessary operation for those who suffer from gender dysphoria because of the serious mental health impact it has on them, and the high suicide rate among those who have the condition. To suggest that a trans person won’t die if they are refused a sex change is just wrong, many will at their own hand, or make many attempts.
Stop convoluting it with abortion, which we know you’re against, and that it has only been suggested Trump’s actions may have an impact on in some cases.
Suffering from gender dysphoria and being refused gender reassignment results in serious mental health issues and a high suicide rate.
The following people thank Ron Nasty for this post:
The Hole Got Fixed, alittlebitolder, QuarryMan, WeepingAtlasCedars, lovelyritametermaid"I only said we were bigger than Rod... and now there's all this!" Ron Nasty
To @ Ron Nasty it's @ mja6758
The Beatles Bible 2020 non-Canon Poll Part One: 1958-1963 and Part Two: 1964-August 1966
5.46am
26 January 2017
Offline Let’s not pretend that there’s anything more to what Trump is doing than cruelty. The cruelty is the point.
The following people thank QuarryMan for this post:
lovelyritametermaidI've been up on the mountain, and I've seen his wondrous grace,
I've sat there on the barstool and I've looked him in the face.
He seemed a little haggard, but it did not slow him down,
he was humming to the neon of the universal sound.
9.15am
19 October 2016
Offline Dark Overlord said
When i say necessary operation, i mean something like open heart surgery where the patient can die if the operation isn’t performed.A trans person won’t die if they don’t get a sex change, nor will a woman if they don’t get an abortion (at least ~99.9% of the time).
That criteria makes absolutely no sense. Many “medically necessary” surgeries are not a matter of imminent life and death. I would not be dead if I hadn’t had my gall bladder removed, I would have continued to suffer extreme periodic discomfort. Would you consider, say, a cleft palate repair to be unnecessary? The issue here is that you don’t believe gender dysphoria to be a true medical condition. The medical community disagrees with you. Your position is on some very thin bioethical ice.
The following people thank Pablo Ramon for this post:
QuarryMan, The Hole Got Fixed9.34am
9 March 2017
Offline Ron Nasty said
Stop convoluting it with abortion, which we know you’re against, and that it has only been suggested Trump’s actions may have an impact on in some cases.
Sorry about that. When i first read the article, it made it seem like abortion played an equal role in this. To make things easier, i’ll be focusing exclusively on sex changes right now.
Suffering from gender dysphoria and being refused gender reassignment results in serious mental health issues and a high suicide rate.
I don’t think that’s the case. Don’t get me wrong, transphobia does lead to a high suicide rate but there’s a difference between having to look around for a doctor willing to give you a sex change and the actual oppression trans people have to deal with on a regular basis. Worst case scenario, the closest doctor willing to give them a sex change is far away and they’ll have to drive or ride a Greyhound for a little bit.
Pablo Ramon said
That criteria makes absolutely no sense. Many “medically necessary” surgeries are not a matter of imminent life and death. I would not be dead if I hadn’t had my gall bladder removed, I would have continued to suffer extreme periodic discomfort. Would you consider, say, a cleft palate repair to be unnecessary? The issue here is that you don’t believe gender dysphoria to be a true medical condition. The medical community disagrees with you. Your position is on some very thin bioethical ice.
I wouldn’t consider either medically necessary surgeries. Repairing a cleft palate is just a flat out cosmetic surgery and while i’m glad you had your gallbladder removed, it’s not a life or death thing.
If you're reading this, you are looking for something to do.
10.02am
19 October 2016
Offline Dark Overlord said
Pablo Ramon said
That criteria makes absolutely no sense. Many “medically necessary” surgeries are not a matter of imminent life and death. I would not be dead if I hadn’t had my gall bladder removed, I would have continued to suffer extreme periodic discomfort. Would you consider, say, a cleft palate repair to be unnecessary? The issue here is that you don’t believe gender dysphoria to be a true medical condition. The medical community disagrees with you. Your position is on some very thin bioethical ice.
I wouldn’t consider either medically necessary surgeries. Repairing a cleft palate is just a flat out cosmetic surgery and while i’m glad you had your gallbladder removed, it’s not a life or death thing.
Well where is the line drawn then? Is medical necessity not a continuum or spectrum? If surgery can allow a person to live free of pain as opposed to living in a lifetime of agony, you don’t view it as medically necessary? If a surgery can reduce or slow the long term effects of a degenerative disease and prolong and/or improve a patient’s life you don’t view it as medically necessary? I had a palate resection surgery 20 years ago to alleviate sleep apnea. Apnea would have, over the ensuing decades, reduced my quality of life and slowly resulted in declining health. Cleft palates put children at risk of ear infections causing hearing loss. Is improvement of a patient’s life and long term improvement of survival not a relevant driver for medical necessity?
The following people thank Pablo Ramon for this post:
The Hole Got Fixed10.44am
9 March 2017
Offline Medical necessity is on a spectrum:
Level 1 is life and death scenarios like open heart surgery where something has to happen NOW or you’ll die.
Level 2 is things like gall bladder removal that if not performed, can keep you in permanent physical pain and or reduce your life expectancy for reasons besides suicide.
Level 3 is things like sex changes that if not performed, can keep you in psychological pain and can encourage you to commit suicide.
Level 4 is things like bagel head where it’s solely done for cosmetic reasons.
When it comes to whether or not the government should force doctors to perform these surgeries, they should for level 1, i’m fine either way for level 2, and they shouldn’t for level 3 and 4.
If you're reading this, you are looking for something to do.
12.20pm
19 October 2016
Offline Dark Overlord said
Medical necessity is on a spectrum:Level 1 is life and death scenarios like open heart surgery where something has to happen NOW or you’ll die.
Level 2 is things like gall bladder removal that if not performed, can keep you in permanent physical pain and or reduce your life expectancy for reasons besides suicide.
Level 3 is things like sex changes that if not performed, can keep you in psychological pain and can encourage you to commit suicide.
Level 4 is things like bagel head where it’s solely done for cosmetic reasons.
When it comes to whether or not the government should force doctors to perform these surgeries, they should for level 1, i’m fine either way for level 2, and they shouldn’t for level 3 and 4.
OK, so the aspect of this policy change that appeals to you, then, is that it somehow changes protection of gender reassignment surgeries which you believe doctors could be “forced” to perform under Obama-era policy.
Edit – I’m not sure the lines between you levels are as clear cut as you make them out to be…what about a procedure that isn’t imminently needed to prevent a current risk of death but will ultimately prolong life by, say, 20 years…
Here’s what’s actually happening here – the Trump administration is rolling back a regulation that controls interpretation of the Health Care Rights law (HCR), which is part of the Affordable Care Act. HCR which prohibits discrimination in health coverage and care on the basis of race, color, national origin, sex, age, and disability. The Trump administration is specifically changing the way that regulation is enforced so that it no longer prohibits discrimination against transgender people. So, basically, the Trump administration is explicitly stating that it will enforce healthcare-related laws that prohibit discrimination on the basis of “sex” ONLY insofar as “sex” refers to the physical gender of the person. An example of what this means, apart from the reassignment surgery question, would be, for example, a biological man who suffers from gender dysphoria – a “woman trapped in a man’s body” – who, let’s say, happens to also be diabetic. The local endocrinologist could, under this policy, legally refuse to treat her diabetes, simply saying he or she doesn’t treat transgender people. Do you support that aspect of this regulation? What if the transgender person had Covid-19 and was denied testing and treatment? Note that courts have been very clear for decades that protections against discrimination on the basis of “sex” encompass discrimination against transgender people. Note too that virtually ALL of the cases that have arisen under this section have concerned this sort of discrimination, e.g. delay of care due to repeated questions about gender, denial of care to transgender people and that sort of thing.
The “forcing doctors to perform sex changes” bit comes from the idea that under the old rule, a hospital could be required to perform, for example, hysterectomies for gender reassignment purposes if the facility provided that kind of treatment for other medical conditions. Let’s just say that’s not as clear cut as you might think. Keep in mind that insurers and doctors are permitted to refuse to perform a procedure as long as their reason for that refusal is non-discriminatory. Patients can’t just insist on medically unnecessary surgeries. Nor does the rule require insurers to pay for gender reassignment surgery, there just has to be a non-discriminatory basis for the exclusion. And really what we are talking about is doctors who object to such surgeries on religious grounds, rather than any actual medical or scientific grounds. I have yet to see even one actual example of a healthcare provider being “forced” to perform gender reassignment procedures against their will. I challenge you to find one, and replying that “well it must have happened because doctors objected to the law” is not actually demonstrating that there is such a case. My understanding is that the objections have been purely theoretical…
The following people thank Pablo Ramon for this post:
Dark Overlord, QuarryMan, The Hole Got Fixed1.20pm
9 March 2017
Offline If you’re right, then i completely concede my point. No one should have to the right to refuse service irrelevant to whether or not they’re LGBT+ on the grounds of whether or not they’re LGBT+.
However, i don’t know why anyone would be that much of a dick to do something like that nor why Trump would agree with those people.
If you're reading this, you are looking for something to do.
1.30pm
19 October 2016
Offline Sad but true, people are a******s.. From a 2018 article reviewing complaints under this provision:
“The most common complaints involved individuals being denied care because of their gender identity or transgender status. There were 13 such closed complaints among the 31 complaints involving gender identity discrimination that CAP reviewed. Complaints included a transgender woman being denied a mammogram because of her gender identity; transgender people being denied sexual assault medical forensic examinations; and a transgender man being refused a screening for a urinary tract infection because the clinic claimed it only provided those screenings to women.”
Other examples mentioned: A transgender woman who went to the hospital with cold symptoms, but care was delayed because of repeated questions about her gender identity and inappropriate questions about her anatomy at intake; a transgender woman with a disability who was repeatedly harassed by the driver of a medical transport service that took her to and from her doctor’s appointments; a woman who was separated from her wife during an emergency room visit and her wife was not permitted to enter her room for more than two hours; while recovering from an appendectomy, the doctor treating a transgender woman refused to call her by the correct pronouns and said the doctor does not deal with “these kinds” of patients.
The following people thank Pablo Ramon for this post:
Dark Overlord, The Hole Got Fixed1.43pm
26 January 2017
Offline Thanks for the writeup, @Pablo Ramon . Helped me understand what’s happening a lot better.
In some good news, the US Supreme Court has ruled in a 6-3 decision that employers who fire workers for being gay or transgender are breaking US civil rights laws. I have to applaud typically conservative/originalist justices Gorsuch and Roberts for not simply siding with conservative orthodoxy on this.
Also, the absolute stencil who decided to urinate next to the memorial of PC Keith Palmer (who died in the Westminster terror attack in 2017, a British hero worth remembering if there ever was one) who had ostensibly gone to London and drunk 16 pints the previous night in order to ‘protect statues’ (though he was not sure which statues he was supposed to be protecting), has been sentenced to two weeks behind bars.
The following people thank QuarryMan for this post:
Pablo Ramon, lovelyritametermaidI've been up on the mountain, and I've seen his wondrous grace,
I've sat there on the barstool and I've looked him in the face.
He seemed a little haggard, but it did not slow him down,
he was humming to the neon of the universal sound.
1 Guest(s)