Taxpayer Funded Sex-Change Operations Likely Under new healthcare plan?

I'll pick up quoting in a minute but let's fast forward: Dr. Collins continues in saying that through centuries of scientific "twin" studies, percentages of various human personality traits ascribed to heredity have been estimated. he lists a table from Genetic and Environmental Influences on Human Psychological Differences, J. Neurobiol. 54 (2003):4-45 where each of the traits has a strict definition in the science of personality analysis. The traits and percentages were as follows:

General cognitive ability 50%, Extroversion 54%, Agreeableness 42%, Conscientiousness 49%, Neuroticism 48%, Openness 57%, Aggression 38%, Traditionalism 54%

"These studies lead to the conclusion that heredity
is important in many of these personality traits...though genetic research on human behavior holds the exciting promise of improved interventions in psychiatric illness, this research is also somehow upsetting, as it seems to tread dangerously close to threatening our free will, our individuality, and maybe even our spirituality.

"We need to get used to this, however. The molecular definition of certain human behaviors is already happening. Several groups have published papers in the scientific literature indicating that common variants in a receptor for the neurotransmitter dopamine are associated with an individuals score on the "novelty seeking" trait in a standardized personality test. [He quantifies this saying that it's basically irrelevant to an individual as it's only one "very small" proportion to the variability of that particular trait; but he means to say we'll be seeing a LOT more of this stuff...they're patenting a lot of it too I'm sure.]

Dr. Collins mentions the neurotransmitter serotonin as evidence for "gene-environment interaction" correlating it with significant depression...

"An area of particularly strong public interest is the genetic basis of homosexuality. Evidence from twin studies does in fact support the conclusion that heritable factors play a role in male homosexuality. However, the liklihood that the identical twin of a homosexual male will also be gay is about 20 percent (compared with 2-4 percent of the males in the general population), indicating that sexual orientation is genetically influenced but not hardwired by DNA, and that whatever genes are involved represent predispositions, not predeterminations...

"[for example =P lol] Could ciminality even be influenced by inherited susceptibilities? In a way that is both obvious to everyone but not usually considered in quite this context, we already know this to be true. Half of our population carries a specific genetic variant that makes them sixteen times more likely to end up in jail than the other half. I am, of course, referring to the Y chromosome carried by males. The knowledge of that association, however, has not undermined our social fabric, nor has it been used successfully as a criminal defense by guilty males..."

"To summarize... There is an inescapable component of heritability to many human behavioral traits. For virtually none of them is heredity ever close to predictive. Environment, particularly childhood experiences, andthe prominent role of individual free will chioices have a profound effect on us. Scientists will discover an increasing level of molecular detail about the inherited factors that undergird our personalities, but that shoud not lead us to overestimate their quantitative contribution. Yes, we have all been dealt a particular set of cards, and the cards will eventually be revealed. But how we play the hand is up to us."

and with that I would encourage all of you to watch the movie GATTACA. Dr. Collin's class is dismissed =P

"I'm curious to see longer term studies, if they exist."

Google is free.

And yes they do.

the imaginative couldntfindausername informs us all that Google is free...heh, imagine that. He's so positively affirmative to support his own conclusions and premises that he'll forthrightly place the onus to prove it on his opposition! =P A model citizen fit for a global empire I'd say!

*yawn*...AGAIN:

and what do you say to people who undergo the "mimic" operation and then later decide it wasn't the right thing even for all your encouragement and support? ...silence? in Fact, More silence, as before when I first posed the question?

I can hear a pin drop... heh... is the celebration all that matters to you people?

"place the onus to prove it on his opposition!"

Eh, no. You proclaimed a desire to improve your ignorance of the literature, google is a good way to start that process giving 13 million or so hits for 'sex reassignment surgery long term' [dedicated academic databases like ScienceDirect are better, but not everyone can access that sort of resource] If you want to make some sort of coherent point after you've actually gone looking for research, people will gladly have a looksee at your argument.

When you are ignorant of the evidence base in a given area, the onus is on you to go and address that limitation - it's not up to me or anyone else to go looking for studies you want to find.

Good grief, do your own homework.

"good grief," eh? :D lol Alright, Charlie Brown.

for all your appeals to outside authority and my own self-confessed ignorance what do you counter with? your opinion? and I should go digging through resources you suggest to support whatever opinion of yours that is? ;D heh ...I asked for a study, possibly even a series of semi-related studies. And you're right, not everyone has access to more than a few better resources, not only that insights--ironically, that must come as a surprise to you why I called for it in the first place. Pure genius, my friend. You remind me of the guy pictured here =P lol But as confidently as you've assert yourself, I'm sure you've done your OWN "homework" now haven't you, to be so opinionated...one would hope. But neither still yet do you cite any particular study or finding in favor of your own position, whatever that is, to vett your "informed" superiority, and still yet also do you also bicker with me rather for the marvel of what might simply pose for intelligence in your own way--in the lack of any evidence to critique certainly.

"First of all I'm FOR gender reassignment, I never stated or suggested otherwise."

Didn't intend to imply otherwise - other upthread comments showed a distinct lack of understanding on the part of some people, partly due to unfamiliarity with the language. That's what I was going after.

If we ignore the small number of essentially vacant upthread comments, this has been one of the better threads in terms of differences in opinion. The structure of the Current system seems to actively discourage actual discussion, with the absence of more forum-like thread organisation lending itself to simplistic uni or at a push bipolar comments. Hopefully the impending site revamp will address this weakness.

I did not think you were offended. I was just speaking about how I feel. But yeah I get what you're stating.

I have not taken neurobiology courses, but I have taken biology and social science courses including anthropology and sociology classes like stratification, family and intimate relationships, and race, gender, culture and sexuality.

jubal

"I have taken biology and social science courses including anthropology and sociology classes like stratification, family and intimate relationships, and race, gender, culture and sexuality."

Then you must realize "Gender is a social creation." is at least a little biologically disingenuous. There have been enough studies on infants of different genders reactions to different stimuli and their proclivities for different activities to strongly support some innate gender differences. I would agree with the idea that many of the particulars of cultural gender roles are strongly modified by environmental factors but to state ubiquitously that "Gender is a social creation." is at least misleading.

"Sexual orientation is what you are born with"

You are spot on and I commend you. This is of course obviously true and has been proven repeatedly by the same techniques on infants mentioned above.

"...although most people are truly bisexual in their orientation, because of strong social taboos, they are forced into the dialectic of straight or gay..."

Their is a tremendous amount of historical evidence to substantiate the prevalence of human bisexuality.

All in all an excellent truthful post. Keep spreading the truth.

"Then you must realize "Gender is a social creation." is at least a little biologically disingenuous. There have been enough studies on infants of different genders reactions to different stimuli and their proclivities for different activities to strongly support some innate gender differences."

One needs to be careful, as you say, when using words with mutlple connotations.

Gender qua social role [boys are accountants girls make the tea] is indeed a social construct - an artefact only loosely related to fundamental differences. In that sense of the word it is a social creation.

On the other hand, gender qua psychological role is different and is related to fundamental and recognisable differences in psychology. Girls are not just boys with labia. In this sense, gender is not a social creation.

Which is why we have trans people - their psychological gender does not match their plumbing. Since we can't "fix" the mismatch by changing the psychology [and shouldn't - attempts to do that have had horrific consequences] but can make reasonable efforts at changing the plumbing, that's what is done.

@bullpcp

You might be interested in checking out a few recent studies (unfortunately, I can't remember the link off the top of my head, but I will try to find it) where researchers found that the brain activity of transgendered people tended to more closely match their post-transition sex rather than their pre-transition sex. So, someone born biologically female, but who feels male would have brain activity that you would expect to see in a man, not a woman.

Obviously, there are a lot of gray areas when you talk about things like typical brain activity, because there are a lot of individual fluctuations. But those studies indicate that transgenderism is more complicated that previously thought, and may indeed have a neurochemical and biological basis.

Illegals do not get social services, not for at least the last five years. You have to prove you are legal to receive services in most states now. Illegals can't even get drivers licenses anymore, in most states.

Your information is skewed to the right with a twist of lame.

jubal

Social services, at least economically, include all services paid for by tax payer money. Are you trying to imply that basic infrastructure is somehow not utilized by illegal aliens? They don't use roads? They don't use public schools? They don't use local clinics? They don't use police, fire departments, ect. Are you seriously unaware that our tax dollars pay for all social services, and that they don't pay into these systems? Your simplistic view of social services is a little surprising. I'm not talking about social security, medicare, or medicaid. I'm talking about the benefits, both goods and services, they receive from public funding without contributing.

Your simplistic view of right versus left politics is disturbingly inane. If I was somehow on this right side politically I wouldn't be insulted so what exactly was your point. I don't care about your politics or the right vs. left absurdity. I was simply stated the consensus economic view of illegal immigration. Your dislike of this reality has no baring on its accuracy. It's like getting mad at how unfair it is that 2+2=4 when 2+3 gets to equal 5.

ooh...someone needs to come to Houston to see what Illegal aliens get and one wonders what is the difference between Citizen and someone who just is here because they didn't get caught crossing the border.

J_Jammer
LOL. I do live in Houston in the Clear lake area. I know illegal aliens get public education because I worked for the school district. Illegal seasonal workers children get their own more expensive special programs to accommodate their parents. I know they get clinic access because I have used clinics. I thought it would be obvious that everyone uses roads, the police, and firefighters but I must have been mistaken. Somehow the idea that illegal immigrants that use services paid for by taxpayers without paying a dime makes me a right wing nut. Or the idea that illegal immigrants are substitutions in the labor market. I don't understand how these apparently obvious statement would warrant the negative comments "skewed to the right with a twist of lame." or "Troll" without even the pretense of a rational counterpoint.

Troll is the new hot term to make people feel justified in not responding to someone. I could careless who calls me troll. It doesn't alter what I've stated nor will it keep me from saying my opinions.

And their children get free clothes and all kinds of things...

I understand that people want a better life for their families and I am not opposed to the laws changing to make it easier for people to become citizens, but I am opposed to seeing people waiting to be picked up for jobs at gas stations on Westpark. It is so trashy to see that. I don't use those gas stations....but I would if they were not there.

Everyone deserves to have a chance at something better, but everyone has to abide by the tax laws or the burden becomes worse for those that do pay. It's just not fair. Think of how much money the Government would have if people paid their taxes instead of cheat the system as well as just not paying.

it is frustrating to pay the outrageous amount of taxes I already pay and not see the benefits that illegals get for just being Mexican.

Most of the illegals I know all pay taxes. Programs that run on Spanish television stations advise them that they should pay their taxes. In these programs they are told that whatever changes immigration reform may bring, that they will be more respected if they act as though they already were legal with regard to taxes, and especially those who have children born in the United States.

Also it is increasingly more difficult for businesses to hire and use unlicensed "independent contractors" in most states within the construction trades. Local jurisdictions are asking for the legal right to do business be proved. Illegals cannot prove such things. So realistically, most illegals have to settle for fewer and fewer jobs available to them. They get domestic help jobs, or work where there is a lot of cash trading hands like outdoor markets and food vendors, but even at this level, more and more jurisdictions are clamping down. There has been a massive push to roll up the red carpet to illegals in practically every state that is having economic worries and budget problems, which recently is practically every one. So the money that you are claiming is benefiting them is drying up.

Now there are clinics that provide services to illegals, but many of them are charitable organizations that don't rely on public funds as in "from our taxes". In our community the organization is called Volunteers in Medicine. The collect nominal fees from everyone regardless of their status, and they are open to the entire community, meaning White and Latino Asian and Black.

Things have gotten so bad for illegals in my state that many of them have gone back to their countries, the ones that remain do so because they have a financial investment here such as owning a home or a business. There are quite a few in this situation, but it is because they have children who are citizens, or they have a pending application with Immigration. Their applications can take for many of these people as little as 5 or 6 years and most take around 10 years to get processed and decided.

Essentially it is simplistic to blanket all "illegals" into one category, because there are several different circumstances present. Just exactly what is your solution? How would you reform the immigration laws? I haven't seen you offer any solutions, your just so full of yourself with all this information about studies, basically repeating what others have said. What do you propose? Where do you stand?

There are groups of Mexicans (because they are) that wait to be picked up to be used in yard work or moving boxes or whatever the people in the vans and the trucks want them to do.

Explain to me how they pay taxes...when they are paid with cash.

I know this because they go shopping and they pull out hundreds from their pockets and they pay. No one that pays taxes puts that much money in their pockets. The only people that do are those that do not have a bank and pay no taxes other than when they buy things....

WHICH IS WHY...the IRS should go away and they should implement a flat tax. Then that will be that...and illegals will not need messages (that they do not listen to) from their Spanish speaking TV station telling them to pay their taxes...because no matter what they buy they will be paying as much as everyone else..period.

I agree with the flat tax.

I didn't say that all illegals are paying taxes. But when they buy stuff, they are paying sales taxes, and when they buy gasoline and cigarettes, they are paying taxes. Many so called social services are funded by these types of taxes. So, yes they are contributing by consuming in this country with the untaxed income.

However, it doesn't account for the billions being sent "home" south of the border. What say you about that?

I understood your statement about them paying taxes in that manner. I do not wish for them to go home nor do I wish that they never came or they beef up security to cause problems for people that just want to have a better life (security for the drug wars are a must....though). I do not like shelling out hundreds of dollars for taxes out of each pay check for what? If one can live in America by only paying the taxes you mentioned. I would be a richer person to live in such a manner.

jubal

First of all you're taking statistics and economics rather personally. The fact that economically speaking illegal aliens have a net negative effect on the economy isn't even debated anymore. This is not a condemnation of them or meant to slander them. You are trying to turn a financial fact into some sort of social argument. I neither stated nor implied the ethical ramifications of these facts only that they are facts. Personal beliefs have absolutely no baring on the numbers.

"Illegal aliens don't bother me as long as they don't expect to benefit from programs that they don't pay into." Apparently you missed this part of my first post.

Again let me reiterate. Illegal aliens works for less money and don't pay taxes, or at least not all taxes, but receive the use of social services far in excess of what they would pay in taxes EVEN if they payed taxes unless they where at least of middle class status of above. Again even if they did pay all of their taxes, which is impossible without a social security number, unless they are at least of middle class social economic status of above they would receive social benefits far in excess of their contributions. This is reality. It's cold, hard, and ugly but, it is the truth.

I'm not trying to imply anything through some subtle use of subtext so please try to stop inferring.

Illegal aliens that pay all the taxes, have children, and are in trouble of losing their housing and jobs because of more stringent oversight by the government are in a terrible position. I feel sorry for them, I can empathize, with being hungry, cold, and homeless without hope but I can also see that they made mistakes. I know people how have waited their entire life's to become US citizens. Some literally died and had family members die of old age waiting for citizenship. I can empathize with their anger with illegal aliens, they feel that they have been cheated for being honest. While they spent thousands of dollars and waited decades to become citizens others with less scruples simply entered illegally.

"Essentially it is simplistic to blanket all "illegals" into one category," I didn't blanket all illegals. I simply stated their aggregate effect on the economy.

The reality is that people will immigrate into this nation either legally or illegally. You can't stop immigration nor should you. If you try to limit it too stringently you simply increase illegal immigration.

Just exactly what is your solution? How would you reform the immigration laws?

I would embrace immigration with enthusiasm not seen since turn of the last century. I would increase the number of immigrants drastically. Protectionist dogma has made people overly fearful of immigration. I would streamline the immigration process. Technological innovation would be a good start along with the removal of much of the bloated bureaucracy. I would do everything in my power to get the process to one year or less. I would remove racist nationalistic quotas. We must remove much of the incentives to enter this nation illegally.

I haven't seen you offer any solutions, your just so full of yourself with all this information about studies, basically repeating what others have said.

You never asked my opinion about immigration reform. I interpreted your comments to mean you somehow disagreed with the economic impact of illegal immigration. I also interpreted your comments to mean you somehow added your own subtext and that there has been some sort of miscommunication. As far as being full of myself I am often wrong but not about the net economic effect of illegal immigration.

What do you propose? Where do you stand?

I stand for freedom and prosperity for the US and abroad.

As a side note thank you for subtly pointing out the negative connotation of calling people "illegals" I will try to do better.

These people are not Hollywood harlots that just want a boob job so that they can attract a director who will put them in a film where they will sit on a "disco stick" and make people marvel at how voluptuous she is.

This is for people that feel entrapped in a body that they don't feel comfortable in. They are not just doing it on a whim. No one would just want to be a woman or a man on a whim...it is such an intrusive and time consuming process to go through.....it's not as self involved as botox.

"it's not like a child who has a heart defect"

What about a child with a facial cleft?

A cancer patient with a disfigured nose?

A burns victim with scarring across their back and arms?

Psoriasis patients?

Should a car accident victim be given orthopaedic reconstruction to preserve the function and appearance of his leg or just put up with the non-life threatening but severely distorted outcome of not providing the surgery?

Did you not read my last paragraph?

" Now besides some mental issues these people just fine, how dare they take time from a reconstructive surgeon when he/she could be repairing people's faces from burns, car accidents, deformities, gun shot wounds and stabbings."

That paragraph is full of words and thoughts, but no heart.

"how dare they take time"

You fix that by getting more surgeons and by getting them more experience of more varied procedures relevant to their specialty thereby driving up the skill level and spurring the development of novel, faster techniques.

You don't do it by having ideological, medically ignorant commentators sit in judgement over who does and does not merit healthcare.

Hey I'm not for the system. But if you have government in charge, they will dictate what care you have or not. I'm sure they will see it the same way as me. "No Heart" eh? They aren't going to waste 10k-60k on someone with nothing wrong with them, just so they can feel better about themselves. You aren't using your brain, we will have a limited budget to pay for care, why waste resources on someone without a physical problem. This country has a limit on the amount of money it can print,, before people stop investing in it.

That's the thing though many of you have not been in healthcare so you have no idea what goes behinds the scene. If there is a major accident the paramedics can pick and choose who lives and who dies. That person is code black leave them, oh we have an orange get the chopper.

"You aren't using your brain, we will have a limited budget to pay for care, why waste resources on someone without a physical problem."

Many of the most costly illnesses in terms of direct costs of treatment, comorbities and indirect losses through decreased productivity etc are psychiatric or psychological in nature.

The best way to save overall healthcare costs is to deal with as many problems as possible.

The analogy of triage is misplaced - paramedics judge whether or not there is an overall benefit, they don't make ideological judgements. "He's a gonner" is triage, "I'm opposed to the existence of his condition" is not.

"You are taking time from a surgeon and the tax payers money just so you can mutilate your sex bits."

You are wrong. Surgeons who specialize in SRS are not going to be doing appendectomies or gall bladder surgeries. It is a highly specialized field. So their time is not going to be taken away from other "more important" surgeries, as you imply in your post.

"This country has a limit on the amount of money it can print,, before people stop investing in it."

The money is already worthless FIAT currency. There is no REAL MONEY that we are trading in our daily lives; no silver or gold coins. Everything is paper and aluminum, nickle and steel; backed by the "full faith and credit of the US." So as far as I am concerned, it doesn't matter how much they print and spend, its all going to crash like a house of cards someday. Until then, I vote for compassion and care for all human beings, medical, food, shelter, education, and free speech.

Re: last sentence. Yes it was read by all those who responded but to tell the truth, there are missing words in that sentence; poor construction.

That would be psychosis, which should be covered under the plan's psychiatric provisions.

Hold on let me use sarcasm for a moment....

oh yes that's the same exact thing as changing sexes. Because you know even animals do that. The blue whale...they can scale back that blubber and be a slim dolphin. Oh yeah baby.

Even though I find it highly annoying when you look at someone and you can't tell if they are male or female because they like to blur the line of what that is....(and I think it is STUPID...yes STUPID)....becoming a bear is not the same thing as someone wanting to become a woman or a man. You may feel it is a dumb procedure but oh well it's going to happen whether you get to be a bear or not.

Or whether you can bear it or not. heh heh

I consider your ignorant and bigoted comments an insult to my people.

"That would be psychosis, which should be covered under the plan's psychiatric provisions."

Interesting, as I feel that many - and perhaps yourself - would say the same about "gender-reassignment" surgery had today been 100 years ago when almost anyone would consider the idea of a "sex-change" to be psychotic, crazy, or insane.

But nowadays people don't bat an eye when hearing the idea of "sex changes" which are ridiculous. "Gender reassignment" surgery doesn't change gender any more than surgery to make a person appear more like a bear actually makes a person a bear.

"Gender reassignment" surgery only makes a person into a cheap knockoff of the gender they were not born as. Chopping a man's penis off, fashioning of a vagina & vulva by a surgeon, and giving the man female hormones does not make a man into a woman. It simply results in a man with a disfigured penis with the addition of tits.

Right down to the fundamental chromosomal differences, there is more difference between men & women than penises & vaginas, breasts or no breasts.

I certainly have no problem at all with people going through with these procedures. I however won't call a man who's undergone a "sex-change" a woman. He is in denial of his gender & I certainly will not partake in his delusion by calling him a lady.

People who think they're women trapped in men's bodies are insane. There's nothing wrong with that, but they're insane. I realize I'm not preaching to the college indoctrinated liberal choir here.

"People who think they're women trapped in men's bodies are insane."

The collected body of knowledge of every relevant medical and psychological body says you're wrong.

But hey, obviously you've got research to back your claim up and didn't just trot out that line with no evidence base, right?. Right? Oh dear.

"The collected body of knowledge of every relevant medical and psychological body says you're wrong."

Direct me to this collected body of knowledge which you speak of. Please don't embarrass yourself by linking to some opinion statement made by the APA. Among the many science illiterates that read current.com, there are those that realize that the APA isn't the best when it comes to keeping their politics out of their "scientific opinions".

There is no research which one could conclude that "transsexuals" are insane or otherwise. In everyday terms though, I consider them insane.

"There is no research which one could conclude that "transsexuals" are insane or otherwise. In everyday terms though, I consider them insane."

Logic fail. You lose.

"Logic fail. You lose."

Is that what you say to save face when you have no argument but don't wish to admit it?

GO mojojuju! ;)

Perhaps that's true, but I really would like to see reform in the area of the right to die movement. I believe strongly in giving terminally ill patients that option.

Yes. Those that have so much pain that they cannot stand it....I agree that they deserve the right to choose to die.

That would be a great provision but conservatives have been so opposed to the idea I can't imagine that would be allowed through.

It most likely will be used as a diversionary tactic to give them something to cut.

Good post as usual, bullpcp. I always enjoy hearing what you have to say. You're a realist, aren't you?

I consider myself to be a realist then a idealist. Because without the realism part you are at best ineffective and at worst actively destructive and without the idealism there is no impetus to enact change for the better.

Well, that's a great answer. I'll have to work on my "idealist" half, because what you say is very true.

I consider myself a realist, looking things straight in the eye without letting my emotions color the truth, like it or not. Idealism is a softening agent, allowing one to hope for better.

Good job. Now that you know how things are you can find out why they are that way and attempt to improve them. At that point you will be well ahead of me. Good luck.

I'm not confortable in my own skin because my butts too big and my chest is too small. I feel that I have the mind of a big chested, skinny model stuck in this body. Shouldn't our taxes pay to correct that too? I mean, it's causing severe psychological issues for me. Besides, it's all a result of creating new taxpayers through childbirth. Please Obama, if you are going to pay for a woman to have a penis, couldn't you pay for a woman to have breasts?

Can America wake up now?

Michail77 I think you should get your breast and your top model physique.

I think you must have meant that previous comment for mlpntr, not me. :)

However, the problems with the big butt and chest can be easily fixed by diet and exercise. If a butt is abnormally huge it should get some sort of medical attention.

But it's not cosmetic. For people who are transgendered, it really is life or death to be trapped in the wrong body. I've talked to people who will say, without that surgery they would rather die than continue living in the wrong body. Dismissing it as cosmetic surgery doesn't even begin to address how important gender reassignment surgery is to some people.

Hmm, you're probably right. I don't know a whole lot about gender reassignment, but it always seemed to me that they are just adding or subtracting, the same could be said of breasts or penis enlargements.

Nvm me though, I admittedly need to do more research on the subject before making a sound opinion.

I agree Steph- all the experiences and stories I've seen with transgendered people point to the idea that it is not cosmetic at all, it is a very crucial surgery that literally gives them their life back.

"adding or subtracting"

That's the same for *all* medical and surgical treatments.

In some cases, it would certainly be appropriate to provide breast or penis enlargement - cancer or trauma survivors for example.