Yeah, its mostly an ideology, the goal of which is to erase differences between male and female in order to undo the traditional family unit because mum, dad and 5 kids is seen as an impediment to the 'world government' that the elites are always on about.

No one "chooses" to be something other than the gender they were assigned at birth. Either someone is trans, or they are not. And the symptoms of gender dysphoria are easily treated: simply accept them for who they are and not who their genitals say they are.

What an utter pathetic organisation the Australian Christian lobby group is.

Let me understand this, you have no problem with the schools Chaplin program which sees people with no qualification other then a religious belief giving advise to children.

But you have a problem with a gender councilor who has a PHD on the subject.

Smells like your problems based on your religious views not on reality.

Attacking someone credentials is a path you go down when you're on solid ground. Citing a doctor writing in quadrant who you fail to mention is also a member of Fred Nile political party and has spent time training a terrorist group medic's is not a smart move.

Cranbrook school:

Three days ago...filmed sex attack at party, subject to police investigation.
50 boys under suspicion by police investigating rape case.

Where the moral calibre of headmaster himself, Nicholas Sampson, was tested in an appearance before the commission into Institutional Responses to Child Sexual Abuse, under question of his dealings with a homosexual pedophile teacher, at his previous posting at Geelong Grammar.

And in a lighter note, Cranbrook senior students suspended for seriously injuring a possum, while on an outdoor camping trip in a local national park.

And today's news from Cranbrook? Transvestites!

Cranbrook, THE most prestigious school in Sydney. FMD, no hope for Australia's future!

Several prominent psychiatrists in the US, including one who pioneered gender transition at John Hopkins Hospital have come out strongly opposed to sex change in transgender people.
They rightly state that no amount of drugs or surgery can change the DNA of anyone, that you will always be the sex/gender you were born as and that data shows that even in the most accepting of countries, people who have undergone sex change still have an extraordinarily high rate of suicide.
They maintain this is a mental problem, not a physical one and should be treated as such.
Trying to normalise this condition is just another trigger for the escalating level of depression and suicide we see these days.

"The latest edition, DSM-5, maintains that gender dysphoria - also known as gender identity disorder - is, well, a disorder."

Totally wrong. Gender Identity Disorder (GID) is gone and was defined as gender non conforming behaviour (it actually patholgised a lot of kids who were not trans but thought to be 'pre homosexual') who then suffered 'gay/trans conversion therapy' (they are the same thing by the way)..

Gender Dysphoria is the distress at not being your true gender. In other words, if you are trans, and are stopped from being, and expressing, your internal gender identity, then you suffer (and as one who suffered it, trust me it is terrible).

But being transgender in itself it NOT a disorder at all...as stated by the APA, the creators of the DSM.

As for the other nonsense, yes I have breast now therefore I have similar (time adjusted) risk of breast cancer ...so what.

And this howler: "worsening of psychiatric disorder"
No, study after study has shown that transitioning improves mental health considerably ..and the younger it is done the greater the improvement.

The last longitudinal study into kids who transition young show their mental health stats are identical to their cis peers ...an amazing improvement.

And this nonsense: "high rate of remission after the onset of puberty".
Totally untrue. Even Dr Zucker who pushed gay/trans conversion therapy for pre pubescent gender non conforming kids stated that, in
Zucker's own words:

2015 GIC Review. Interview with Dr Zucker. GIC-Review-26Nov2015b.pdf
Page 12: " At age 15 in adolescence the most likely outcome is persistence of the GD. 70%-80% would continue to have GD. The treatment would be social transition and biomedical treatment.

Gender Identity Disorder? Yes, identifying with a gender is a disorder!

The details, whether the specific gender that one identifies with happens to correspond with the genes and/or organs of their body or otherwise, is irrelevant:
We are not a gender, so identifying with what we are not (in this case a gender) is indeed a mental illness!

I'd be happier if the contemplated surgery just altered the attraction to normalize it as appropriate for the external gender specific biology? And not brand new science!?

But reportedly already trialled in scotland in the seventies?

One can remove breasts or turn an internalised penis into a pseudo vagina and load up with artificially induced hormones to alter outward appearance, that sometimes comes with quite massive negative consequences?

But to date none of the far less intrusive reported surgical experiments, that as far as I'm aware, simply burn out the inappropriately firing sexual specific centres in the basal ganglia.

And given all that vastly more radical alterations currently supported and in vogue, is clinically and chemically possible?

What then of same sex marriage, if one partner appears to all observers as a well muscled bearded man!? Or alternatively, a woman replete with (surgically achieved) breasts, a vagina and inwardly relocated testicals?

Oddly, few in the gay community seem to want or welcome the normalization of their gender with what would be "normal" or straight, according their biology, or gender specific genitalia.

But have no problem, it would seem, with far more radical aforementioned procedures, that alter outward appearances only, rather than the tiny neurological, entirely autonomous, motor centres at the base of the brain, that control or decide all of it?

And no Dr Brown, I am not talking about shock treatment or aversion therapy, which is a very different treatment aimed a very different parts of the brain! And as such, less than worthless or effective!
Alan B.

Big Nana: McHugh, the psychiatrist from Johns Hopkins, to who you refer has been thoroughly discredited.

McHugh himself wrote in 'Psychiatric Misadventures', "It was part of my intention, when I arrived in Baltimore in 1975, to help end it." These are not the words of someone who dispassionately collected, analysed and interpreted data, but rather those of an ideologue who worked from the conclusion back.

(Basically, he is a hard-core Catholic ideologue who wishes to impose his theocratic views on the unwilling. His so-called research is only able to be published in magazines sympathetic to those views, not peer-reviewed journals.)

Zhou and others followed up on the influence of hormones upon the foetus and sexual identity, and reported in 'Nature' during 1995, "Our study is the first to show a female brain structure in genetically male transsexuals and supports the hypothesis that gender identity develops as a result of an interaction between the developing brain and sex hormones." Their study might have been the first, but it hasn't been the last.

Kruiver and others reported (J Clin Endocrinol Metab (2000) 85:2034–2041) that "The present findings of somatostatin neuronal sex differences in the BSTc and its sex reversal in the transsexual brain clearly support the paradigm that in transsexuals sexual differentiation of the brain and genitals may go into opposite directions."

The more our ability to probe into brains advances, the more we see biology at work. Furthermore, the evidence on outcomes shows that transsexual people who receive sex reassignment surgery have much better outcomes that those who do not. Dhejne, Lichtenstein et al (Long-Term Follow-Up of Transsexual Persons Undergoing Sex Reassignment Surgery: Cohort Study in Sweden, DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0016885) conclude "Our findings suggest that sex reassignment, although alleviating gender dysphoria, may not suffice as treatment for transsexualism, and should inspire improved psychiatric and somatic care after sex reassignment for this patient group." In other words, sex reassignment surgery helps those who need it. Yes, they have are high suicide rate than the population at large, but that suicide rate is lower than for those who did not have sex reassignment.

The author and ACL ilk just can't countenance the idea that some folks just don't fit into a couple of neatly-defined boxes of gender and sexuality.

Their instinct when encountering such ambiguity is to panic, and try to shoe-horn those who are different into one of their religiously-defined little mental boxes in order to relieve their own confusion.

Most of us never think about what our gender identity
is because it usually matches our sex at birth.
Most of us can't really begin to imagine what it must be
like to feel that we were born with the wrong sex.

A few years ago I read the book -"He Did It Her Way -
Carlotta - Legend of Les Girls." It was a fascinating
and often hilarious journey into her world as a performer
and transexual who started life as a Balmain boy and went
on to have one of the first sex change operations in
Australia. Candid, witty and irreverent - classic Carlotta.

It made me realise that transgender people risk social
stigma, discrimination and harrassment. It also made me
realise that despite the risks of being open about one's
gender identity and living a life that feels truly
authentic can be life-affirming and even a life-saving
decision.

Hey LisaM,
I just want to say that I personally take offense at being labelled or referred to as 'cis'.
In future as to not trigger me and cause anxiety and depression, I'd prefer you referred to me as 'normal'.

Your use of the word 'cis' implies that a man and woman together is 'not normal'.
The word is construct designed by people who don't consider themselves as falling into this 'normal' category, which is not people in the 'normal' categories fault.

I disagree with political correctness in that it's implied that I must change my behavior due to someone else's problem.

Ignoring patient autonomy in favour of someone else's personal beliefs is not an example of "duty of Care" either.

Given that there are certainly cases of ambiguous genitalia, hermaphrodites and similar, it seems pointless to pretend that brain structures could not display similar variations. What the patient needs or believes is a far more important a consideration than what an uninvolved religious advocate imagines they should.

I wish great frustration and failure to the ACL in this matter.

Rusty.

Armchair Critic,: 'Cis' simply means 'self identifies as the gender they were assigned at birth', it is simple technical term, used since the early 1900s.

It has nothing to do with sexuality by the way. Cis people have all sexualities: homosexual, heterosexual, bisexual and asexual. So do transgender and non-binary people as well.

In the very truest sense no one is 'normal' or 'average'. Everyone belongs to some subgroup, subcategory or another. In fact I'll bet that if we took your major characteristics (height, weight, ethnic background, education. religion, sexuality*, colour, class, even hair colour and type) you'd find you belong to a very small sub-category of humanity. In the very truest sense we are all minorities.

No one is asking you to "change my behavior due to someone else's problem.", unless your behaviour is bigoted and prejudiced. Then you are being asked to change it.

If you are a fairly decent, honest, open minded, polite person then there are no issues are there?

See this for example about the myth of the 'average': https://www.thestar.com/news/insight/2016/01/16/when-us-air-force-discovered-the-flaw-of-averages.html

*Including sexual fantasy. Amazing the huge number of people who act heterosexual but are something quite different in their fantasies.

Hey LisaM,
Thanks for the info.
I don't see you post very often, and I don't want to give you any reason not to post in future so I'm trying to tread carefully.

Quote>>No one is asking you to "change my behavior due to someone else's problem.", unless your behaviour is bigoted and prejudiced. Then you are being asked to change it.<<

I believe in freedom and liberty for everyone; BUT I do not believe that a person should be FORCED to give up their freedoms and liberties so that someone else can have theirs.
In regards to 'bigoted' and 'prejudiced' I'm not likely to treat anyone in the street disrespectfully unless they treat me disrespectfully first, no matter what opinions I hold on this forum.

But I reserve the right to be a bigot, on issues where I think it's valid.
I'm intolerant of 'radical Islam', anyone have a problem?
I'm sure some would; don't care.

You most certainly are attempting to change other people's behaviour by imposing 'Newspeak'.
It doesn't stop there, by deleting words that you feel are inappropriate you're actually trying to change the way people think, which is the real purpose of 'Newspeak'.
Look it up, find out for yourself.

I was raised with the concept 'Who own's the problem?' drilled into me.
It was part of making me learn to take responsibility for myself.

I fully understand what's going on here.
People who don't consider themselves included in the 'normal' category don't want us referring to ourselves as 'normal' because then they will feel excluded, or 'not normal'.

- But I don't own that problem do I?

First you attempt to argue that people who self identify as the gender they were born with aren't normal.
The you try to dilute that further by arguing everyone's different and 'what is normal' attempting to divert from the only real question which is whether your 'straight' or 'not straight'.

I don't care about political correctness.
I'll never buy into it.

LisaM:

If no one is normal or average then why do people with minority sexualities take offence at criticism of their sexuality? If you are not responsible for the way you are born then why would you feel bad when someone derides you for the way you were born? You would only feel bad if it was somehow your responsibility and could be changed. It is irrational to feel bad about what you cannot change.

Constantly we see that people of a minority sexuality take offence and want the state to protect them from being offended. Either they do not agree with your opinion that none of us are normal or they do not accept that it is not their responsibility.

There is a big discrepancy between the way they behave and the argument that no one is normal.

phanto,

"If no one is normal or average then why do people with minority sexualities take offence at criticism of their sexuality?
If you are not responsible for the way you are born then why would you feel bad when someone derides you for the way you were born? "

Please tell me you were drinking (or doing drugs) when you posted that.

LisaM:

Why do you need to ask? Are you uncertain that what I said was so irrational? Wouldn't you just ignore it? How stupid is it to give it more 'oxygen'?

Oh Gawd! Here we go. Have fun with that, LisaM. That's phanto's way of trying to get the last word in: question your motives for continuing a discussion - with some bogus, pseudo-psychological explanation as to why you are - in the hope that you just go away.

Hi yo Philips!

Here he comes on his trusty white steed to save LisaM from big bad Phanto!

As predictable as ever.

phanto,

If you’re so sure that what I did was predictable, then why do you need to state that it was? Simply accept that it was predictable move on. The fact that you felt compelled to state that what I did was predictable suggests that you are unsure about whether or not it was predictable in the first place and needed to re-assure yourself that it was.

Like I’ve said to you so many times before, phanto, your silly little tactic can be thrown right back at you.

But, no, you can relax. I’m not here to take over. LisaM and Mayan have done a more-than-adequate job all by themselves. I just thought I’d give a less-regular poster a heads up on a pattern of behaviour that she may not yet be aware of.

Philips:

"I just thought I’d give a less-regular poster a heads up on a pattern of behaviour that she may not yet be aware of."

No need to justify what you are doing then is there?

AJ Philips: Thank you, but it is ok, I've argued with TERFs and more trolls than you can poke a stick at many times, this is rank amateurism in comparison.

I am still going by the 'drunk' theory though ...he doesn't seem to have sobered up yet and realised what he actually posted and what it meant.

Here I am, just popped up from a dive in the OLO pond and bingo, another idiot trying to tell normal people to accept a classification of different.

Lisa M believes we are all different. No no, not so. Homosexuals are different. They are different because they are in a very small minority from the normal population.

In the extreme, homosexuals are branded as queer, but among the gentry, that acceptable and universal term has been usurped by more placating descriptions.

Mores the pity!

diver dan

"Homosexuals are different. They are different because they are in a very small minority from the normal population."

And how many LGBTI people do you think there are then?

diver dan: Just to start the ball rolling, do you know there is 1.7% of the population that is intersex? That's about the same as the number of red heads....

LisaM:

"do you know there is 1.7% of the population that is intersex?"

There are 1.7% who claim to be intersex. There is not scientific test for intersexuality.

phanto: Go and argue with OII Australia then ...and tell then their numbers based on peer reviewed scientific research is wrong...you being such an expert after all...cough...

Since you haven't even checked their website.....more coughs.

You do know what peer reviewed science is, don't you?

But if sexuality is a continuum where does intersex start and where does it stop. You would need to know this in order to count them wouldn't you?

Have you ever thought about the link between sexuality make up and taking your own life.

Yeah. Anyone who thinks that sexuality is worth taking your life over has serious mental problems. Nothing is worth taking your life over. Anyone who takes their own life has lost all perspective and that is a much bigger issue than being rejected because of your sexuality.

You have got your sexuality out of all proportion if you kill yourself over it.

phanto: "But if sexuality is a continuum where does intersex start and where does it stop. "

Umm being intersex has nothing whatsoever to so with sexuality, nor does being transgender.

Intersex and trans people show the same range of sexuality as do cis people: female attracted, male attracted, bisexual and asexual.

Poor simple fools!