Comments on: The Dr. Phil Show on gender identity, Part 3 – Should puberty be delayed?

By: carole

carole — Tue, 20 Jan 2009 17:51:30 +0000

In reply to Mary. I don't know who Stanton is; I will, however, read him. Nicolosi I have read. Stanton, I have not. I choose not to discount someone's ideas/research if I've not read him or her extensively.

By: Mary

Mary — Tue, 20 Jan 2009 06:38:07 +0000

Carole,
Please let’s end this where Warren asked us to? What criteria is used for science, research, evaluation, statistical models, etc… are defined differently by different people. As we can see that flurries of arguments surround all kinds of research (notice you did not mention Stanton to criticise)
I never argued that I was right based on research, I never provided research, I did criticise the research you provided (you did not counter that criticism except to say you don’t get math and stas or something like that), etc….
I said offer me the same consideration to opine differently and that no final conclusion on the matter was offered. That is a polite way of saying your “proof” did not persuade me. I am sorry you did not understand my criticism of his work.
Having said that, does not mean that I am wrong or right.
I gave an opinion, backed up why my opinion is still valid and you have rejected it. Fair enough?

By: carole

carole — Tue, 20 Jan 2009 05:48:21 +0000

Okay, Mary, I’ll end with your saying to me

“Funny though, how you question so many things and then use one research snippet as a foundation point (disregarding all of your doubts about other scientifc research on various subjects) and stand on one idea of one man.”

Geez, I thought I made it very clear that I have sought to read more than one person on the subject of evolution (as well as on the subject of SSA). The “snippet” was for the purpose of an answer to a post. I can hardly quote entire articles and books.
Oh, and for their sake, please don’t accuse them of being a Nicolosi–they are scientists.

By: Mary

Mary — Tue, 20 Jan 2009 04:41:58 +0000

At least let me comment?
Carole, just because Stanton, Nicolosis, or anyone else has studied something and provided research (as in your case with Cochran) does not mean that because my research is limited, that I have to accept it. That’s why people continuw to doubt and question those who put up some research and studies – and eventually we do learn more. Take for example, the virus’ role in gestation and placentas. We used to think that all viruses were bad for us. Oooops – turns out the specialist and those who have devoted their life to such reproductive knowledge were wrong.
You may insult me all you want for not bending to one person’s authority. Just like others, an instinct can make us ask questions and help us grow and develop. I believe that homosexuality has provided mankind with an evolutionary benefit/advantage. Time will tell. Funny though, how you question so many things and then use one research snippet as a foundation point (disregarding all of your doubts about other scientifc research on various subjects) and stand on one idea of one man. Can’t you afford me the same – that is to look somewhere else for answers and not be satisfied with the status quo?
You have to admit – the conclusions aren’t entirely there, yet.

By: Warren

Warren — Tue, 20 Jan 2009 04:33:43 +0000

I think Eddy pointed out that this thread has become about how homosexuality could survive rather than should puberty be delayed.
The evolutionary question is an interesting one which has provoked some research with mixed results. Some research shows mothers with gay relatives bear more children. Other research hoping to find that gays invest more in their families have not found that.
Unless, someone has additional data, research or links to a theoretical argument not mentioned, then I would like the thread to return to the topic of whether puberty delaying drugs are a good course for trans kids or should they experience adolescence first to see if GID persists.