From the oral argument in Chiles v. Salazar.
Note that 90% is used in 2 different contexts in that argument.
October 10, 2025
"But one of the things that's so problematic about Colorado's law is that it undermines the well-being of kids that are struggling with gender dysphoria."
"And so Colorado accepts that up to 90 percent of kids who struggle with that before puberty will work their way through it and realign their identity with their sex. But this law says that if any of those children go to a licensed professional and say: I would like help realigning my identity with my sex, that licensed professional has to decline to help them.... Moreover, if they're continuing down the path of transition, then, unfortunately, they get locked into that path, and, eventually, it leads, over 90 percent of the time, once they start down the path of social transition, it will lead to the route of medicalized transition, which the Cass report tells us comes with a lot of harm and devastation...."
From the oral argument in Chiles v. Salazar.
From the oral argument in Chiles v. Salazar.
Posts
48 comments:
But, but, say the Three Sisty Uglers, “90 per cent” of the multilaters, activists and teachers promoting the mutilation are Democrat surrogates. That should be dispositive of this case.
a solution in search of a problem
Most will affirm their sex and gender. A minority will transition as homosexual. A minority will be targeted for conversion. A minority will entertain abortive ideation of selfie or others.
I like the double use of 90%. It makes the point that the current "standard of care," affirming the young person's current inchoate feelings about sex, gender, and identity, results in almost all patients' being medicalized for life, even though almost all of those patients would come through the present moment without medical intervention if the standard of care were watchful waiting.
Listen to Erin Lee talk about this issue.
Our public Schools are being turned into child-sexual abuse and gender confusion centers.
Children in CO and elsewhere, are becoming suicidal based on what the corrupt child-abusing left are doing to them.
it is the Hymnal of the Old Ones,
The transification-ratchet is not an accident. It moves in one direction for a reason.
It is not organic.
It has power behind it.
It has purpose...
And it has malice.
The people? of Colorado voted for this. Let them cut each other's peckers off. We do not want these people's gene's polluting our pool.
"When your enemy is busy castrating himself, stand aside and quietly allow him to finish the job." - Sun Tzu, on the Art of War
Planned Peckerhood (PP) has wicked precedents.
Also, a front hole... stop digging.
Note that 90% is used in 2 different contexts in that argument.
And in both it looks remarkably like number pulled out of thin air.
it is the Hymnal of the Old Ones,
And the refrain is always "Do what thou wilt."
Conservatives have allowed childless /child abusing nut jobs to take over school boards.
here - watch this Pourdre valley school board meeting. it's insane.
I beg all of you to watch this - to understand what the child-less/ child abusers on the left are doing to our children, behind closed doors - in our public schools.
Please Watch.
FLC said, "'When your enemy is busy castrating himself, stand aside and quietly allow him to finish the job.' - Sun Tzu, on the Art of War"
“Keep your enemy off balance. Misgender them at every opportunity.” – Master Sun, The Art of War
It seems that there is a cohort who are delighted if their child has gender dysphoria. It's very much in fashion this season, particularly if there's a surgical remedy. One would hope that it goes out of style before too many children are injured.
The only children "struggling" with gender dysphoria are one who've been brainwashed (groomed) by parent and/or the "education" establishment.
The people pushing the creation of eunuchs should all be drug out in the street and publicly executed.
It is really hard to come up with anything more evil than convincing a child to turn themselves into a eunuch.
@trcrosse, "Transproxy Syndrome by Motherchausen"
It's in the RSM-5-TR (Ride's Statistical Manual - 5th Edition - Tranzmadness Revision)
These courty things are so much fun, it’s interesting to find out how much freedom I will have when they tell me next year.
FormerLawClerk said...
The people? of Colorado voted for this. Let them cut each other's peckers off. We do not want these people's gene's polluting our pool.
"When your enemy is busy castrating himself, stand aside and quietly allow him to finish the job." - Sun Tzu, on the Art of War
One of the worst parts of Islam is the female genital mutilation that is rampant in the most barbaric tribes.
Adults in tribes that practice this act should all be killed.
This goes for parents and communities that practice eunuchification of children. If you are involved in turning your kids into sterile eunuchs for life you are committing one of the most barbaric acts of evil possible. Even if you rape you children they can recover from that. They can't recover from "transitioning."
"It is really hard to come up with anything more evil than convincing a child to turn themselves into a eunuch."
This.
the Hymnal of the Old Ones
Back to the future. Progress of the liberal kind.
Throw another baby on the barbie, she's done. Wicked.
Affirmation therapy in lieu of conversion corruption improves viability by 90%.
FormerLawClerk said...
“The people? of Colorado voted for this. Let them cut each other's peckers off. We do not want these people's gene's polluting our pool.”
Genes are hardware. This is not a hardware problem; it is a software problem.
It seems that there is a cohort who are delighted if their child has gender dysphoria. It's very much in fashion this season
I came upon - or think I did - this phenomenon very early - before Trump 45. Progressive friends' young teenage daughter "came out" as trans - coincidentally (?) within a couple of months of three of her classmates in a class of like 18. The parents reaction -
I mean, it's hard to say for certain. They're progressives but they're also good people (of course those things are not mutually exclusive). But I remind myself that at that time, I knew next to nothing about the "Irreversible Damage" phenomenon, yet I remember, upon hearing the mom say solemnly, "The child we have is not the child we thought we had," thinking, she almost sounds... what, a little bit proud? Of what? Of her daughter, or of her own reaction? And if of her daughter, of, what, her courage in coming out, or of how special she is now? It was subtle. And the parents had had time to develop their public faces about what had happened in their family. So maybe I was entirely wrong. But I've thought about that conversation a lot over the years.
FormerLawClerk said...
The people? of Colorado voted for this.
For a person that yaps like he understands Gell-Mann Amnesia; you seemed to have forgotten Colorado is the State whose "Secretary of" tried to ban Trump from a Primary ballot because of an indictment alone. Either that, or you believe despite that, there is no corruption in Colorado's elections and the people there had free and fair elections.
they put Tina Peters in prison, for trying to obtain the true ballots,
My wife and I arrived in Colorado in the last days of 1985 and lived there for 27 years. I arrived from the south and crossed the Raton Pass on I-25. We passed the town of Trinidad, CO, which was the Sex Change Capital of the state, if not the country. A doctor had operated a sex change clinic there for years. I've heard he's long since retired or died, but I think the clinic is still there. Sex changes are an old thing in Colorado.
From what I recall reading, that clinic used a long process that included psychiatric evaluations and gradual transitions before the hormones and surgery began, and they didn't do it on children. If correct, it sounds like they were doing things in a sound and responsible manner.
Sex is an immutable state established at conception. Gender (e.g. sexual orientation) is, apparently, susceptible to environmental corruption and climate change. Transsocial choices (e.g. dress) is a product celebrated in social clubs and queer parades.
Adults can choose to indulge surgical, medical, or psycho-atric corruption of selfie at their expense and liability.
So 90% was used twice in two different contexts therein. It reads as follows: 90 out of 100 kids with gender dysphoria grow out of it, essentially. For the other 10 out of that 100, if they get medicalized transition treatment as a minor, 9 out of those 10 get even more messed up lives and only 1 sees any improvement in their psyche. Seems pretty clear that medicalized transitions of minors don't work well.
"But we're running out of penises for the girls!"
FormerLawClerk said...
"The people? of Colorado voted for this. Let them cut each other's peckers off. We do not want these people's gene's polluting our pool."
Don't know whether it was the people or the legislature, but either way there are likely to be a large % of people that utterly disagree.
And God forbid one of those people's kids expresses any uncertainty at an early age. The state would likely start transitioning the kid without the parents' knowledge because this is an ideology to so-called progressives.
And even if the parents knew, and wanted to take a different approach, the state's made that different approach illegal. Again, ideology. No "choice" allowed. ALL MUST SUBMIT TO THE STATE.
It's bad enough that they take such an uncompromising approach (like forced vaccinations as well) on any issue. But here, when 90% grow out of it, and 90% of the others get more messed up with this state ordered "treatment" you gotta ask ... WTF?
mikee, I don't think that's the correct interpretation.
Your first statement is correct. Evidence suggests that almost all of children with gender dysphoria resolve it without medical intervention, usually by coming out as same sex attracted.
Your second statement is not correct. There is no 'remaining 10%'. The basis for the second 90% statement is not all minors exhibiting gender dysphoria but those who start the process of transitioning. The evidence there suggests that once started down the road of non-medical transitioning, the majority of minors wind up getting hormones and surgeries.
To Jamie's point, the Colorado law essentially forbids 'watchful waiting' and demands an immediate implementation of a plan for transition even though that process is likely not reversable.
Telling kids about "gender dysphoria" undermines their well-being. Maybe some really have it naturally, but they are the minority now.
Most kids experiencing gender dysphoria just need sex-correlated gender affirmation therapy, a helpful guide, and a steady hand to navigate through their confusion or dissatisfaction. A minority are actually transgender (e.g. homosexual). A minority will entertain abortive ideation and take affirmative action to relieve their "burden" and should be monitored for exhibiting transhumane choices.
"But we're running out of penises for the girls!"
Unfortunately, you're not well informed on this point. Every "trans-man" patient gets to disfigure themselves for the hidden treasure resulting from the phalloplasty procedure: "Phalloplasty uses skin and tissue harvested from various donor sites on the patient's own body to construct the new phallus, with the forearm, thigh, and abdomen being the most common locations for these skin flaps. The specific donor site is chosen based on the patient's goals, the desired characteristics of the new phallus, and factors like the available tissue, aesthetics, and potential scarring."
All for something that does not serve any of the most pleasant functions of the real thing! Ridiculous.
The Colorado law would seem not only to accept both of those truths, but to also deny those truths to the very people who need them the most. A therapist treating a person struggling with gender identity cannot tell the patient those statistics. Really?
Achilles wrote: "One of the worst parts of Islam is the female genital mutilation that is rampant in the most barbaric tribes. Adults in tribes that practice this act should all be killed."
Which Jew do I see about the part of my penis they cut off?
The foreskin? To amputate your penis you would have to identify as the female sex in a nominally secular progressive sect in a sanctuary state in a liberal jurisdiction.
Perhaps Planned Penishood for gender conversion or Planned Pubertyhood for a full service abortion. It's #HisChoice under the Pro-Choice religion. A wicked solution, a progressive condition, without a future "burden" of evidence.
This term at SCOTUS may be the point at which trans-craziness loses as badly in the judicial arena as it did electorally in 2024. If you listened to the oral argument, it seemed quite likely that Team Trans (in that case, represented by Colorado) is headed for defeat. Two other trans-focused case are on the docket. The first, Trump v. Orr, is pending on the government’s application for a stay of a district court injunction against Trump’s executive order requiring US passports to identify the holder by biological sex (so, M or F). Biden had changed the longstanding policy to require a passport to identify the holder by gender identity (so, M, F or X). From my reading of the briefs, it seems very likely that Trump will prevail. The third case (actually two that will be argued together) are from W Va and Idaho. Both states adopted a statute banning biological men from women’s sports teams through college level athletics. The Ninth and Fourth Circuits affirmed injunctions against enforcement of those statutes. The Trump DOJ filed an amicus brief supporting the states and urging reversal. Again, hard to see the SCOTUS not agreeing with that view. So, stay tuned— this will be a momentous term of the Court for lots of reasons.
>Note that 90% is used in 2 different contexts in that >argument.
>
>And in both it looks remarkably like number pulled out of >thin air.
I believe it was pulled from someplace much darker than thin air.
Fun Government Offices Quandary: why do girls who "transition" to boys, whether it be in their heads, their hormones, or the whole Frankenstein tamale, still do not have to register for the Selective Service, while boys who "transition" to girls, whether it be in their heads, their hormones, or the complete inversion or removal of their male bits still have to register for the SS?
C'mon, man. Biden's autopen had four whole years to correct this bureaucratic oversight. The only transwomen who don't have to register are the ones continuously incarcerated between 18 and 26, the years when registration is required.
This is an oh-so-silly first-world issue on every level. For the millions of years of evolution that preceded non-fatal medical surgery, sex = gender = XX or XY chromosomes. All others were biological defects and they didn't continue, and some suffered from mental illness too.
People like mid-century-progressive Jordan Peterson spent a lot of effort helping people get their thinking in line with reality. This included acceptance of one's body, even if disabled, ugly, or not what one "wanted" in a childish fashion.
Only after the invention of sanitation (e.g., Lister), modern medicine, and government-funded medical insurance could transition surgery become economically possible (and then possible on a large scale). This is a 'human right' only to the extent that taking government-paid trips to the moon or bottom of the sea are a human right.
Never mind that the medical and insurance industries have inherent conflicts of interest, as profits depend on fining treatable conditions. Vanderbilt University staff said the quiet part out loud. The ghost of Joseph Mengele approves.
Post a Comment
Please use the comments forum to respond to the post. Don't fight with each other. Be substantive... or interesting... or funny. Comments should go up immediately... unless you're commenting on a post older than 2 days. Then you have to wait for us to moderate you through. It's also possible to get shunted into spam by the machine. We try to keep an eye on that and release the miscaught good stuff. We do delete some comments, but not for viewpoint... for bad faith.