>

It's ironic too, because Republicans are also quick to legislate such that non-parents cannot discuss these types of topics with children at all (or without notifying the parents), which would make this type of abuse (assuming it exists) much easier. 
I don't know, it sounds like parents ought to be the final authority when it suits them, but also need to be state controlled when convenient.
Hi /u/sg4o7vkqj1, you're not in trouble, we're temporarily locking your post.

This post has been temporarily locked due to excessive comment rule violations.  The OP has not necessarily broken any of our posting rules.
Sometimes, if a post gets cross-posted in another sub, this can lead to an influx of rule breaking comments.  We are a small team of moderators, so this can easily overwhelm our ability to remove rule violations.  When this occurs, we must occasionally temporarily lock the post so we can remove the violations before discussion can be restored. This may or may not be what has happened here. 
We are actively cleaning up the thread now, and will unlock it shortly.  We will try and do this quickly so discussion can continue though the amount of time will vary based on moderator availability.
Thank you for understanding. >

The cases don't look at longitudinal studies. Why don't these studies exist? 
If you asked a girl who got a tramp stamp a few days after she'd be happy. If you asked her 10 years later, is it possible her opinion would change? >

Like the conclusion of what you sent is focused on around how to properly word questions as to actually correctly count transgender and non-binary people and not conflate them in the data
​

While trying to include gender identity on survey data, researchers have experimented with different questions, varying the number and the wording of the questions and responses. Even among recent wide population estimates, as shown in Table 2, the most common single-question method was to include a third (or more) option for gender, most often “transgender.” This method is unreliable, however, failing to identify transgender survey participants at rates higher than missing responses (Tate et al., 2013, p. 771). Depending on the question wording, the single-question method also systematically undercounted certain types of trans people, namely those who do not identify with the term “transgender” or any other listed terms.

​

Less-specific language for gender identity also better handles often-rapid terminological changes for trans identities, especially salient in longitudinal studies that will ask for participants’ gender repeatedly. These changes occur at both the individual and community levels and are a challenge to longitudinal studies. For example, many trans people moved away from “transsexual,” which was seen as too narrowly focused on medicalization and maintaining the dominant gender binary. “Transgendered” became a common umbrella term in the early 1990s (at the same time the HRS began), largely replacing “transsexual” (Stryker, 2008). That term has now fallen out of favor to the point that many consider it offensive, because it wrongly implies that gender identity is something done to a person, rather than an identity that is partly the result of their own agency. The preferred term is now “transgender” (GLAAD, 2016, pp. 10–14; Lopez, 2015; cf. Park, 2011). Importantly for the purposes of longitudinal surveys, these are not merely different terms applied to the same population. Rather, terms like “transsexual,” “transgendered,” and “transgender” are the products of different groups to create identities for themselves, and so include different populations. As these definitions change, different individuals may come to identify or disidentify with a given term (Beemyn & Rankin, 2011; Meier & Labuski, 2013; Stryker, 2008), regardless of whether they meet the criterion for being transgender commonly given. >

Question do you think there is transgender people who regret not transitioning earlier? I bet there is more of them then your potential group. Utah ban is stopping HRT which is the bigger talk point >

This is valid. I know quite a few trans folks. Those i know quite well, enough to talk their transition, tell me the one regret is they didn't do it earlier.  But for many that was not possible. Many of the issues trans folks experience post transition could be eliminated by transitioning earlier. Like voice, facial hair, height, menstruation and so on. >

You can legally get plastic surgery when you're under 18 in plenty of US states. It just requires parental consent. Why is it that a 16-year-old cis girl with supportive parents could get a boob job done, but a 16-year-old trans girl with supportive parents can't? Both of them are gender-affirming surgeries. You can't allow one and not the other without being a massive hypocrite. >

Even worse, because SRS isn't cosmetic, it's medical. >


The argument I most often hear is that banning the surgery for our younger trans folk may snowball into banning surgeries for trans people who are older and can absolutely make decisions about their lives.

Isn't this the slippery slope fallacy? >

Your phrasing is that of a slippery slope, albeit much less extreme (and therefore harder to detect) than the "pEoPle WiLl MaRry dOgs" nonsense that's been peddled.
However, I hadn't heard of Missouri exploring that option, so while slippery, your view is rooted in reality. Although "bans to adult transgender people" is willfully ignoring the fact that it's only up to age 25 based on our understanding of brain development. I would support said legislation if all other "adult activities" were allowed only after 25  (e.x. joining the military, driving, voting, drinking, etc.) As it stands, a law like that is either wildly hypocritical or very targeted. Probably both.
That's all to say that I think your concern, while phrased as a fallacy, is sound. Δ
I'm not sure if I can give Delta's but thought I'd try 😀 >

I totally agree. 18 is pretty arbitrary but that's what we've agreed to as a society (for whatever reason). Imposing a higher age limit on any one thing is wrong. Either you're an adult with full rights or a child with restricted rights. >

Agreed! Even raising the drinking or smoking ages to 21 when you can still join the army at 18 seems remarkably wrong, in my opinion. Personally, I think 20 should be the age for things, but that's just as arbitrary as anything else. As long as it's all the same, that's what really matters to me. >

18 isn't arbitrary, it's when most US highschoolers have graduated. So it's more that they see you as an adult after you've reached an age where you are most likely no longer in highschool. And I can actually agree with that, I see a huge difference between highschool kids and college kids/working adults. >

For some reason highschool hadn't occurred to me lol. Thank you for pointing that out! I don't see as much difference between high schoolers and college kids, but you are right that 18 isn't as arbitrary as I thought.
!delta >

Confirmed: 1 delta awarded to /u/massagesncoffee (1∆).
^Delta System Explained ^| ^Deltaboards >

I had to be put on a waitlist for a clinic just for hormone blockers and eventually hormones at 14, after being in therapy for years with 2 queer therapists. At that clinic i would see multiple nurses, a doctor, a psychiatrist, and a social worker.
i had top surgery at 15 and my version of bottom surgery at 17. throughout this entire time i was already very unstable but had i not received the treatment i did, even with all of the drawbacks, i wouldnt be alive today. My trans support groups also made it very clear my transition was Mine Alone. It doesn't need to look like anyone elses and there isn't a right way to transition. you can pick and choose what you want. 
I do not see anyone taking the time to be peer pressured into that. Take into consideration many families already place restrictions on hormones and make their kids wait until they're 18. This ban would just take away resources from people with primarily supportive families.
in the time it takes, usually doctors are able to spot a child influenced by breaking gender roles and traditions and someone who would like to explore that but is otherwise comfortable in their body (someone who will likely not want to medically transition)
vs
a child who is distressed by puberty causing secondary sex characteristics (or lack of) or someone who is having thoughts of harm towards areas of their body they have dysphoria over
(someone who will probably want to medically transition)
EDIT: While I disagree about children transitioning due to peer pressure, there have been a few cases of abuse of parents forcing their kids to transition and buying off or conning doctors. I fear this will be what is more common. >


EDIT: While I disagree about children transitioning due to peer pressure, there have been a few cases of abuse of parents forcing their kids to transition and buying off or conning doctors. I fear this will be what is more common.

Child abuse is obviously aweful, but it's a bit silly to fallback on these cases to justify blanket bans I believe. Like, yeah, obviously, if some deranged folks have enough time and money they can do aweful things. >

Right, cause this isn't the go-to method of abuse for abusive parents (if it's even true this has ever happened). By this logic you'd also ban children from living with their parents because abuse usually takes place in the home.
You deal with this with a highly regulated professional body and strong checks and balances in all healthcare.