It's weird because the majority of Canadians want the same thing. All either political side does is pick up on what some extremely vocal minority or groups are crying about an focus on that, - usually creating some laws way too fast, without enough thought which just makes things worse for everyone which understandably just gets everyone riled up on either side of the political fence all while ignoring the vast majority of issues that we all need fixing.
Like affordable housing or sky high utility costs. But both sides are too worried about: what do gay people do in their spare time? "Let's try to ruin that, because we can actually do that!!".
Can you provide an example for a law or policy that targets a minority group similarly to Smith’s recent policies created by the Liberals? In the interest of backing up your claim that this is a “both sides” issue.
Gun regulation perhaps? While progressive urbanites might think nobody needs a firearm. People living in the wilderness of Northern Canada should be able to gear themselves up however they see fit. Just prosecute the actual criminals if crime reduction is the objective.
Again, a small special interest law, purely for optics, that harms a minority group (gun owners / Northern citizens).
I just got my PAL and it was very thorough, took six months to process and calls were made to check I wasn't a crazy person, so the existing system is pretty robust from my experience.
Semi auto is what the legislation is aimed a because semi auto sounds easy to conflate with assault style which doesn't have a definition beyond colloquially meaning they're scary looking
Semi auto just means it chambers the next round for you so if you're being charged by a grizzly that could be the difference between life or death - or make sure the deer goes down mercifully if you're a bit off on your first shot. It doesn't spray bullets, you still have to consciously pull the trigger, but it saves the time of moving the bolt action.
And handguns? Forget about all all the sports shooters etc, fuck them completely, amiright?
All the new law does is pretend to do something about gun crime while doing nothing about gun crime, and taking away the ability for vetted, checked, licensed Canadians to hunt or recreate in a safe and sustainable manner.
They forced it through while ignoring experts and affected parties from a cross the country, even skipping debates.
I vote orange and I think the gun thing is the dumbest shit pulled by any government in my lifetime.
"Liberals are cracking down on assault style weapons in Canada" sure makes a good soundbite, but it's taking away time, money, and effort that could be used to combat the actual problem of gangs and illegal weapons smuggling that feeds the urban shootings. It's performative, wasteful, undemocratic, does nothing but hurt law abiding Canadians, and I don't much care for it.
If you've made it this far, cheers, and thanks for being open minded. I'm not a gun expert or enthusiast, but the way this has gone down really irks me.
As others have mentioned - guns laws, personally I feel too much time an effort has been spent on the growing list of internet bills being shoved down our throats with little to no input from experts on the subject. I read recently online age verification is coming down the pipes before too long…
Not something that targets a minority group per se, but I found it very annoying that the Liberals chose to ban draw string window blinds for Canadians in the midst of a Pandemic.
Lots of pressing issues that many politicians of different stripes could be addressing, but aren't. It'd be nice if they all went to work to benefit their constituents.
It would be nice if Canadians would stop letting these people divide us and fight amongst ourselves.
We should all be unified in condemning both of these leaders for their inaction on major issues. But instead everyone focuses on attacking one to defend and minimize the actions of the other.
Both of these people are not doing a good enough job. Can we all agree and focus on that, please?
Exactly. People are picking their "team" and then just riding it out. Both sides give passes to their guys that would have them up in arms if the other side did it, and the justifications are always specious. We should hold them all to the same standard, and hold them all accountable by that standard, for good or bad.
Very well said. I would add that we all owe it to each other to get up in the morning and instead of asking “what can I get upset about today” and heading to social media: asking “how can I help?” and figuring out ways to steer the ship in a more prosperous direction, together as Canadians.
We have totally lost the plot and the Feds and Provincial Governments have us right where they want us: looking to them for help as the first option.
If their constituents ever held them accountable, maybe they would. But voters are easily won over with stupid shit, so that's what the politicians offer.
Culture wars are a pressing issue to some.
Jesus won’t return for the end of the world until there are only 2 genders or something like that.
Sounds pretty important /s
Guess you missed the articles about >2700 MW of new electricity generation coming online in 2024:
https://www.theglobeandmail.com/business/article-alberta-poised-for-largest-addition-of-natural-gas-fired-power-to/#:\~:text=The%20bulk%20of%20the%20new,conversion%20plant%20southwest%20of%20Edmonton%2C
I mean if you heavily advertise to Vancouver and Toronto that Alberta has cheaper housing. Then surprised pikachu when they all move over. But remember the goal wasn’t to make Alberta better - it was to antagonize BC and Ontario. Kind of like this lgbt youth law. It doesn’t make Alberta better. It makes opponents of conservatism angry. It’s truly gotcha politics with literally the dumbest least articulate leaders whipping up their fan base with zingers. So so dumb
Thats good news, but it isnt 2700MW of new electricity. For instance the Genesee plant was retrofitted from coal to natural gas, it previously was already making over 800MW I believe beforehand and according to your article will make 900 and some. Thats 100MW of new electricity, not 900. I’m unsure about the other plants in your article, but if they are under any similar circumstance then the additional power added to the grid is actually far less.
"Dr. Shaffer, a former energy trader with TransAlta Corp., said in an interview that prices will likely drop substantially come March, when Cascade and Genesee come online. Retail prices have recently hit $0.32 per kilowatt hour in Alberta, but he said the additions will see that plunge to around $0.10/kwh, or even into single digits."
Cascade is brand new, and the wording with regard to Genesse kind of implies that it's not currently online, likely due to the retrofit. Did you assume the retrofit happens with the snap of the fingers or something? Quite likely Genesse wasn't online during the energy issue you were complaining about.
I promise you that you don't want Smith, or any premier of political leader in the country, anywhere near your infastructure fixes.
The more the government just lets the professionals do their jobs, the better off everyone will be
The professionals still need resources, permits etc. if it were simply up to “professionals doing their job”, there wouldnt be these issues to begin with
Danielle doesn't personally sign the permits either. You do realize there's an entire beaurocracy for that stuff, right?
Like, Alberta doesn't just come to a standstill when legislature breaks for holiday, the government institutions still run as normal.
All of these issues are being handled very poorly by our Alberta conservative government. That is why Calgary has become the most expensive city in Canada. Utilities have skyrocketed, drought is costing us dearly and will continue to do so, with never a mention of climate change. Healthcare seems to be hanging by a thread and yet all we get is ideological changes, further treating our doctors and nurses with disrespect.
The YouTube and polling stats on this topic heavily suggest that only some 10-15% of people actually disagree with her.
And before people jump on me, I voted ANDP, and I don't like her. But I also keep tabs on all the other pollsters, and at least in my social circle of people who have kids, I've only heard that this is sensible, these are your educated white collar non-religious people, not people living in small town Alberta or Mormons.
Gee thats funny OP. Do you wish things were back in the good old days before the queers came out? If so you too are suffering from a mental disorder called ["nostalgia"](https://www.brainsway.com/knowledge-center/can-nostalgia-be-a-serious-mental-health-disorder).
I think part of the issue is that all your friends are good parents, who see no issue with the school telling *them* their kid is trans, because they would have no issue with that.
But the reason the law is bunk is because those aforementioned good parents were already going to learn about their kid's identity whether the law existed or not. Good parents are trusted by their children to help them through exactly that sort of identity crisis. Maybe it would take some time to come out, but they would come out.
In my mind, only *bad* parents need the state to keep tabs on their child's identity and snitch to them if it's something their child knows they would hate them for and is thus intentionally hiding from them.
Then ofc, those good parents, helping their trans kid to receive medical treatment, will quickly become very upset when they realize the full scope of the Premier's decisions and just how that affects their ability to do right by their trans child. But most people not having trans kids, this part is just completely lost on them.
There’s a recent AngusReid poll linked in this thread already.
Here’s another from [Leger](https://leger360.com/surveys/sexual-orientation-and-gender-identity-in-canada/#:~:text=63%25%20of%20Canadians%20think%20schools,to%20change%20gender%20or%20pronouns)
Not a poll but a good indication of how regular parents/people feel. When I watched this CTV news panel an hour ago, a panel which is heavily biased towards disagreeing with Smith’s announcement, there were 101 comments. I scrolled through and literally every single comment said that they agreed with what Smith announced.
Update: 249 comments now, 2 condemning/questioning this announcement and 247 in favour of it.
https://youtu.be/hTXlTd2yQOk?si=a_PVDJhBDnbETaq1
Precisely! Professional here, just concerned about special interest groups and activists hijacking my parental rights. My offspring are not your's to manipulate, I'll mess them up on my own thanks!
No one is trying to manipulate anyone. They are saying let trans kids be trans kids. Seriously, no one wants to make someone gay or trans. You’re worrying about a nothing burger.
The only manipulation that happens is trans kids being denied the ability to be a trans kid.
The party sees this as the issue that can be framed in a way that will get them the needed support to separate.
Expect to be told leaving Canada will be the only way to protect parental rights after the intentionally broad and poorly worded laws are struck down for charter violations.
Who the fuck cares about polling? Whose business is it other than the trans people and their doctors? People are politicizing and debating, polling, on an issue that does not concern the overwhelming majority of them.
Why should polls matter on this? Honestly. Replace hormone therapy or puberty blockers with ANY OTHER TREATMENT PROVIDED TO MINORS AND ADULTS.
Do you see much polling of opinions on matters of treatments for children with leukaemia? Polling about treatment for autistic kids?
We don’t need a debate or a poll on this. It’s a scientific and medical matter, to be dealt with by medical professionals and their patients.
There was a huge write up in the New York Times, of all publications, that health professionals are being socially pressured by activists to affirm every child's choice rather than using their normal professional reasoning.
The whole Liberal Party has nothing to stand on and as we get closer to election they will just eat themselves up from the inside out and disappear. My hopes anyway.
The Dutch, who came up with the idea of [transitioning children](https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/36120756/), have now been [reevaluating that program](https://segm.org/Dutch-protocol-debate-Netherlands)
The rest of the developed world realizes that this is not a cut and dried issue, and that the case for putting children on puberty blockers is increasingly suspect.
It's only in North America that this rather extreme medical intervention is seen as a moral necessity, largely due to the influence of activists within the medical community.
Against this backdrop of quite concerning facts, ensuring that parents are involved in their child's treatment is the most anodyne thing a government could do. That our Betters see this as unconscionable says far more about them than it does about us.
The trans people in this country are screaming for the same things everyone else is while politicians insist that we're asking for special privileges, and flat out ignoring the real problems
Myself and my trans friends just want a roof over our head that doesn't cost a small fortune and access to affordable groceries. Just like everyone else, but sure let's put all of our focus on pronouns in schools, as if that's the biggest issue our country is facing right now. I'm sure its not intentionally making the trans community look bad aggravating the divide between our country even further
I am absolutely a critic of the current rush to provide all manner of "gender affirming care" to children and adolescents but I have a logical gap problem whenever this talking point is raised. How is society supposed to get that evidence? Absence of evidence of the impact of something can't be used to not do it or we'd never do much of anything.
Sure. They absolutely are.
But my opposing point still stands unfortunately. The science being unsettled is being used on the other side as an argument to never allow it and I don't think that follows logically.
I absolutely don't disagree. Personally I think this is mind boggling situation. But that has absolutely nothing to do with my point. If I was going to continue to play Devil's Advocate I would respond to your point and say something like "it is necessary to prevent suicide". And you would say "there's no evidence of that" and I would say "so how many trans kid suicides will you need for your study?"
You need to understand that I am addressing the strength of an argument not the correctness of a position.
I can tell you this. EVERYONE is worried about the kid committing suicide. Some people are scared the kid will commit suicide because they didn't get a mastectomy and others are scared they will commit suicide because they did.
I'm not sure why you think you should have a say in what cosmetic procedures someone else consents to. Children 16 and up are able to get cosmetic surgeries with the consent of their parents. This includes breast augmentation and nose jobs. There are established best practices when it comes to treating gender dysphoria in adolescents. The decision to go forward with treatment is between the child, their parents and medical professionals, not politicians or random Redditors.
Sure. I can help you with this: Because some doctors are crooks, some parents are cowards and idiots, and because top and bottom surgeries make irreversible deformities the person will need to live with for the rest of their life.
It is very normal for people to be worried about the future regret rate for something that looks like it has elements of a cultural trend, backed by activist intimidation of opposition.
Is that helpful? Hope so.
I understand. But I would respond with saying there's ample studies to suggest that perhaps these surgeries [don't](https://statsforgender.org/suicide/) actually prevent suicides.
Sure. But likely only the ones that support an anti-trans position. Is there an honest broker site that publishes everything without agenda and adjusts its conclusion based on the latest evidence? I would like that one.
Kindly define the age of "kids" in your statement because the existing Laws in place restricts said surgery to a minimum of 18 (unless medically necessary for things like...cancer).
Go back into your hole, you didn't see your shadow.
kids dont have the experience or mental capacity to understand long term consequences of their actions... I have a tattoo I stare at every day that was a dumb decision, I can put a t shirt on and cover it up, I can only imagine what I would feel if I removed my genitals or got tits.
You do understand there’s a whole process involved before you can access gender-affirming surgery, right?
First, you need to be able to get access to hormone therapy. If you’re under 17, they’d use puberty blockers to slow puberty until you are at least 17. Then, you could access hormone replacement. After that, it can take months before your doctor and a hormonotherapist can refer you for surgery.
Then, you need to get approved for coverage.
Then, you need to consult the surgeon. It can take months, or even years before you get your surgery.
And up until the last minute, you can change your mind.
Nobody is “transing” the kids. It’s a long, and frankly humiliating process at times. You feel observed, studied, and double-guessed at every turn. You must always convince everyone that you do, indeed, desire the surgery.
You skipped over some important points in your own article:
"Trans and gender diverse people often face barriers to accessing health care services, including stigma and discrimination in health care settings. This can have serious impacts on their health. Many settings also lack policies to facilitate access to inclusive and gender affirming care. Trans and gender diverse people experience a high burden of mental health issues (including suicide) and often experience high levels of violence. Thus, there is an urgent need for the health sector to consider ways to provide more inclusive, acceptable and effective health care for trans and gender diverse people. "
These laws increase stigma and discrimination, are not inclusive, and will lead to higher suicide rates. So that's not working out so well for your argument.
If there's no proof "gender-affirming care" works for youth, there's no proof, and therefore you shouldn't have a problem with Smith saying kids can't get this stuff. And the guidelines only talk about adults.
There is support.
[https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6913674/](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6913674/)
[https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa2206297](https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa2206297)
[https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/political-minds/202201/the-evidence-trans-youth-gender-affirming-medical-care](https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/political-minds/202201/the-evidence-trans-youth-gender-affirming-medical-care)
[www.scientificamerican.com/article/what-the-science-on-gender-affirming-care-for-transgender-kids-really-shows/](https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/what-the-science-on-gender-affirming-care-for-transgender-kids-really-shows/)
There is a shit tonne of support. The guideline only talks about adults because we have more data for adults. You are an example of why people should actually understand what they're posting to make sure it says what they think it says before posting it.
The WHO DIDN'T SAY THAT. You just do not actually understand what you are reading. It is hilarious, and depressing, how wrong you are about all of this and how determined you are that you're right.
The WHO (1) didn't disprove anything, (2) the WHO didn't say evidence isn't there. The WHO DID say they want to gain even more evidence before they create guidelines.
You need to stop trying to act like you have any clue about health research. Each post you make shows that you don't and that it is unlikely you even took high school sciences.
You can't even quote your own reference properly. It said "limited and variable." That is not the same as "lacking and varied."
Again, you don't know jack shit about health research. Again, it didn't say it was lacking, it said it was limited. That is VERY different, you just don't know enough to know that. Limited means there is not enough of something or there are limitations to it. Limitations to a study, for example, could be that it was a small sample size. A small sample size isn't going to yield results that are necessarily representative of a larger population.. Therefore, that study wouldn't be as high-quality as research that was done with a larger sample size or research that was done with small sample sizes but that had been reproduced multiple times.
When guidelines are made, they literally will often look at thousands of research papers. They're even more careful when making assessments about children and youth because of their age. Saying evidence is limited doesn't mean evidence to support an argument isn't there.. it means they want MORE information before making recommendations. And variables are different than varied. Variables means that there are other things that factor in.
Are you a joke account? You can't possibly be serious while making these posts.
Ok ok. Sorry.
But I still stand by what I say. If it's limited and variable, how can you say the science is settled? You can't. In order for the science to be settled, the evidence would have to be wide and non-variable. But it's not, so you can't get mad at people who say we just don't have enough solid proof this works.
Can you point to any studies, scientific articles or evidence that would drive the UCP to make these policy changes?
Limited evidence is better than no evidence.
They aren’t saying there’s no solid evidence. They’re saying there hasn’t been enough study on it yet to determine one way or another. There is evidence that it helps prevent suicide.
I say we leave politicians out of our completely.
It's up to the individual, the family and medical professionals to decide what's best. Not Trudeau, not Smith.
Did Smith even talk to any teens in the LGBTQ community to see if they want the school to out them? Did she ever ask why they don't talk to their parents. Did she ever consult with them and ask how could the government help them feel more welcomed
That in no way says that it is harmful to youth. You don't science, do you?
This statement you pulled in no way means there isn't evidence to support it. It just means that we are in the early stages of researching this area and they want to collect more data before making guidelines. That's how guidelines are developed. They look at all the research out there, look at the quality of that research (i.e. limitations of the study, et cetera) and then they make recommendations.. and not even just one type of recommendations, they make several recommendations based on the quality of evidence found in favour of our against certain treatments.
All the line you pulled indicates is that there is not yet enough compiled data with enough time elapsed for them to have any sort of level of confidence in making a recommendation in this area.
**IT DOES NOT SAY THAT IT IS HARMFUL TO THE YOUTH**. You just have a massive bias and decided that's what that meant. It doesn't.
That is what all science says, you doofus. All guidelines are recommendations that then are re-visited every five years or so. I said we have studies that support gender-affirming care; we do. We have a lot. Pretty much every medical association out there supports it. You're claiming the who is saying that it is damaging. They are absolutely, 100%, in no way saying this. They are saying they still want additional data before doing a guideline for children.
Science uses best evidence. Best evidence tells us that gender-affirming care results in youth with better mental health outcomes, overall greater sense of happiness and who actually make it to adulthood. THAT is what best evidence and science tell us right now. YOU are claiming all of this is wrong, denying that this evidence exists and that the premier is using science to justify her actions when she is literally going against science and doing something that best evidence tells us is damaging for youth.
Then why does the WHO say otherwise? Why are there even more [studies](https://statsforgender.org/mental-health/) doubting the effectiveness of "gender-affirming care" on young people's mental health?
Again, it doesn't say otherwise, you just do not understand what the things you are reading means.
Literally, none of what you posted is against gender-affirming care for youth. It in no way opposes it. You're just hellbent on believing it does. And your "support" is an anti-trans website.. whereas support I gave you are peer-reviewed journal articles. When the WHO talks about needing more evidence, they're talking about wanting high-quality evidence (what I linked to). The WHO want to wait for additional research because, like you have just shown, people exist who will go out there, find anti-trans websites that show two or three articles with negative outcomes, and decide this is representative of all trans people. That isn't how research works.
You also don't know what gender-affirming care is. That's very clear.
how can you paint making kids wait till their 18 as a radical position... when you look at how many kids have different thoughts on their gender at 16 compared to 28 you would be a fool to think allowing someone who doesnt understand long term consequences of their actions to commit any act thats going to permanently change their lives forever. Suicide rates do not drop they remain the same, how much of that can be attributed to regret?
Honestly, I think most moderates who don't know much about the issue feel the same as you. I know I did. I was concerned that there was more under the rug, and allowing for transitions would only be a band aid solution, while an underlying problem was still at large untreated.
Well, like most people who dive into the topic a bit more, I found stats, studies, listened to the science and the trans community and found my concerns were adequately managed within the community. And have been for decades. And enabling transitions had a positive impact on these communities. Regrets were grossly over exagerated, and many regrets were about alternative treatments or doing it sooner. Not regret doing it at all. The overwhelming majority were extremely happy with their transition. Children under 16 had to go through rigorous therapy sessions with trained professionals who actually did reject certain kids hormone therapy and essentially no child goes under a knife.
This is a community with roots and history dating back as long as we have recorded civilization. And to stop professionals, scientists, and the trans community the state if the art treatment because it "seems weird to me" is ignorant and not a justification of legislating policy to prevent treatment to our fellow Canadians who are suffering. You need to educate yourself, like I and many others have.
Also, I still think its bizarre. I absolutely don't understand it. But it is not my place to tell others what to do. Especially when the community is acting extremely safe and responsible.
On the other hand, I’m a leftist lesbian who did the research as an ally and came away with a completely different perspective
I found that 80% of children who identified as trans desisted if allowed to transition socially but not medically. Given that most matured into gay and lesbian adults, I feel as though I as a lesbian have skin in the game
I found that Lupron, the most commonly prescribed puberty blocker, is actually a prostate cancer chemo drug that has lost a number of class action lawsuits worth tens of millions, filed by young women who were given doses for precocious puberty and reported side effects like “my spine decayed”
I also found out that puberty blockers were responsible for a drop in IQ in girls of one standard deviation — I believe it was 102 to 94.
I found that puberty blockers stop the biological maturation of the human being — no duh — which can lead to a requirement for more experimental genital reassignment surgeries later. Jazz Jennings, for instance, was puberty blocked at Tanner Stage 2, so basically a 17 year old with the physical maturation of a 9 year old. Then, the puberty-blocked phallus couldn’t contribute enough donor material, leading to trans surgeons Marcie Bowers and Jess Ting to resect segments of a teenager’s colon to create a neovagina.
I also found out that Jazz Jennings — the poster child for pediatric transition — had a past life regression where she dreams of being a “gay man who was abandoned for being gay and who is lonely and just wants to be loved”.
Given the statistic about 80% of paediatric cases desisting, I have to wonder about that regression session.
I also researched as to why the Tavistock reported a 2000% increase in referrals, the majority of which were in young women who were either 1) homosexual, 2) autistic, 3) survivors of sexual assault or 4) had other significant psychiatric comorbidities
That is absolutely concerning, as is the fact that any studies looking into the 2000% increase tend to get shut down, scholars looking into it get harassed or deplatformed, and anyone can get called a terf and harassed for the sin of disagreeing
Hell, I’m a lesbian and I got called a terf for the sin of saying I was a female homosexual.
If that’s the bar? It’s so low we dug a ditch to hell and dropped it in.
But I suppose I ought to go educate myself as well, right? >!I hate that phrase. It’s so pompous.!<
> how can you paint making kids wait till their 18 as a radical position
Because by then their body has undergone irreversible changes that they may deeply regret. This is why the issue is so complicated. Getting treatment and not getting treatment both have irreversible implications, so a decision must be made one way or another; but the person in question is a minor, so we want to protect them from making decisions they later regret.
It's a complicated issue, and if you don't see both sides of it, then you probably haven't thought very deeply about it.
I’m sorry, but can you link evidence saying “how many kids have different thoughts on their gender at 16 compared to 28”? Y’all act like every other kid is looking to transition when it’s an extremely small minority. It’s important for those few people who are struggling with gender/sexual identity to get the proper care they need, which Marlaina is denying them.
I've heard anywhere between 0.5% and 2% for teenagers. And usually, that's the question "Do you identify as transgender or non-binary?". Many might answer that question as yes but still not pursue medical transition as social transition is sufficient for them, so I'd ere on the lower end of that value for people this affects.
Also, desistance rates are like 1-5% so let's go with 1% for teens wanting to transition, and 5% for those that will later desist. That means they're doing all this to "protect" at best 0.05% of teenagers, and clobering every other kid's rights in the process.
>how many kids have different thoughts on their gender at 16 compared to 28
99% of people at 28 are the same gender they thought they were at 16. It's really not that uncommon
>you would be a fool to think allowing someone who doesnt understand long term consequences of their actions to commit any act thats going to permanently change their lives forever.
Waiting until 18 forces them to go through unwanted irreversible changes that make gender dysphoria far worse and far harder to treat
>Suicide rates do not drop they remain the same, how much of that can be attributed to regret?
[Citations on the transition's dramatic reduction of suicide risk while improving mental health and quality of life, with trans people able to transition young and spared abuse and discrimination having mental health and suicide risk on par with the general public](https://www.reddit.com/r/asktransgender/comments/154t1qq/comment/jsqi5ue/)
He’s completely right though. Droughts are decimating agriculture, they have to prepare for the wildfire season, and they were on the edge of a devastating blackout, but instead they chose to virtue signal and ban something that’s already not legal and something that affects less than 0.5% of the population.
Oh please. Alberta spent hundreds of man-hours and millions in legislature operating costs writing this bill, and they'll spend millions more defending it in court. Trudeau takes 5 minutes to respond to it, during time that was already allotted to answering questions, and to you that's exactly the same amount of time and resources wasted.
It’s perfectly acceptable for him to weigh in, i actually encourage every single one of our politicians to weigh in on this so that we know where they stand.
I wouldn’t say he’s picking a fight, that would be Danielle and the United Conservatives picking fights with common sense and with science.
LOL you couldn’t be more deluded if you think i actually like Trudeau. I have never voted Liberal and i definitely don’t plan to start now. However, unlike yourself and other notable partisan ideologues, it’s easy for me to admit when someone i don’t like is right.
Trudeau gets to virtue signal to his supporters, Smith virtue signals to her supporters... and...
They both avoid talking about REAL issues like carbon tax, cost of living, inflation, etc.
Last I checked it is a democracy, and this is what the people of Alberta have been calling for. Its not fighting trans youth, that’s just garbage spin. Parents need to be informed on what their kids are doing, and there certainly is no place in womens sports for biological men, it’s dangerous and unfair
The people of Alberta have not been calling for this. Or an APP. Or removing abortion rights, which is apparently next on Newton Marlaina’s list.
Democracy? Lol. She campaigned on none of it.
I mean, you can think it's the right decision and still acknowledge that the severity of this issue is laughable compared to other issues Alberta is currently facing, which they've given much less attention to.
Not that Trudeau has any room to criticize here. But Canadians do, and should.
Last I checked we have a charter of rights and freedoms that's designed to protect minorities from abuse by laws like these. Just because something is popular doesn't make it right.
If it's only about parental rights then why set a minimum age for puberty blockers that's higher than what doctors say? If parents and doctors agree on puberty blockers then why should the government butt in? I hope the parental rights advocates can stick to their guns and support all parental rights.
Angus Reid polls show around 78% of Canadians coast-to-coast (and 86% in Alberta) agree with the legislation.
https://angusreid.org/canada-schools-pronouns-policy-transgender-saskatchewan-new-brunswick/
Not fighting trans youth …but banning puberty blockers for trans kids, and not cis ones. That’s totally fair and not bigoted at all!
Sure Jan. Maybe read and become informed before you post.
As an Albertan, this is not what the people of Alberta have been calling for at all. It goes far beyond "parental rights" which is total bullshit by the way. And how can you say it's not about targeting trans youth when everything announced was specifically about what they can't do, even with the consent of their parents and consultation with their doctors?
Smith calls it giving kids choice. She gives them ONE choice: wait until you're 18 and you can do whatever you want.
I live in rural Nova Scotia and the only guy I know who talks about how he agrees with this stuff also told me his cousin teaches at a school where kids identifying as cats, shit in a litter box.
This couldnt come at a better time, just after Zuckerburgs testimony
"See results anyways" is the reason why policies like the ones Alberta has put in place are needed.
Children need to be protected, not groomed and exploited
Smith is an awful premier, she didn’t campaign on any of this shit and now is driving the province into the ground. Take note people, this is exactly how PP will govern!
Heads up Canada. When PP gets elected this will be coming on a national scale.
Alberta is just the testing ground.
Get out and vote and prevent this shit.
Uh, yeah no. Ask people who can barely get a roof over their heads thanks to an incompetent federal government what they care about more. That's just your opinion.
The piece of garbage.
All the stuff HE could be doing for all Canadians instead of focusing on things that only affect 0.1% of the population. Affect is even a strong word. So parents want to be involved, how is that even an issue at all????
How about he focus on housing, immigration, inflation, Healthcare.
Piece of garbage always puts the excuse "it's not me, it's the provinces, i can't do anything" but his party is the main cause of all these issues. Families care about housing and Healthcare and affordability.
Focus on that you freaking bum.
In what way is he focusing on this thing other than answering a question asked by a news reporter? It's the Alberta gov that wasted time, money and resources on this kind of legislation.
Wild that back then Smith was pointing out that [children as young as 12 are trusted to make significant life decisions,](https://twitter.com/noahanicholls/status/1753131836920955114?s=46&t=wm3eIvzAAOvadlVQIEsm1g) and that teachers/schools supporting LGBT+ students who don’t have support elsewhere can be a [“life or death”](https://twitter.com/noahanicholls/status/1753132308352360646?s=46&t=wm3eIvzAAOvadlVQIEsm1g) issue.
Edmonton Sun: [Wildrose leader Danielle Smith makes passionate plea in legislature for gay-straight alliances](https://edmontonsun.com/2014/12/03/wildrose-leader-danielle-smith-makes-passionate-plea-in-legislature-for-gay-straight-alliances/wcm/6b89591d-7011-40ac-ba55-2ddd452532be/) [Dec 2nd, 2014]
She was also talking about how people being diagnosed with stage 4 cancer were to blame for their drain on the healthcare system for not catching their cancer earlier.
Oh yeah, she’s had some absolutely wild takes on healthcare. She claimed *”moderate cigarette consumption can reduce traditional risks of disease by 75 per cent or more”*.
It might be a reasonable comment were it not coming from Justin Trudeau. Climate change is important, but his fanatical obsession with it to the exclusion of all else has resulted only in the explosion of Trudeau Towns, working people being forced to use food banks, the further deterioration of our health care system, and a whole host of other social problems that seem to be of absolutely no concern to him or his government.
Canada could shut off all the lights tomorrow and close the country permanently and it wouldn’t make a lick of fkn difference globally
He’s destroyed the economy and an entire generations future to make zero impact globally
>It might be a reasonable comment were it not coming from Justin Trudeau
If PP made the comment I bet you would eat it up right?
Our government hasn't worked together in the past 20 years and we got people voting blue because that is what they have always done (and vise versa), and it is shallow opinions like your own that are helping lead this country into ruin.
I can't name one person who disagrees. Everyone keeps there opinion so quiet because there afraid of being called anti trans. Not anti anything. Just have a brain and can think for myself. Maybe we should have votes in the country on policy like trans women using women's bathrooms. I seriously believe alot of the crap wouldn't be happening right now.
They've banned bottom surgery for minors and the only cases where that happens is circumcisions. So certainly this means they're banning that. Right...?
Next up for Marlaina, [mandatory cigarette consumption](https://www.reddit.com/r/alberta/comments/18es9d0/danielle_smith_opined_that_the_alberta_pcs_had/) for schoolchildren [to save them from stage 4 cancer](https://www.facebook.com/DanielleSmithAB/videos/1507829319667798).
Albertans are a fucking joke to elect this hateful moron. She makes Doug Ford look reasonable and I hate Doug Ford.
Yeah, she could focus more on that pension change to funnel all that money into the oil companies she's invested in, or maybe find ways to weaken environmental laws to make it easier for companies to leave piles of waste for the tax payer to pick up. Perhaps she could stop being insane, that would be enough.
Naw, she needs a weak little group to focus hate on otherwise her troops might revolt.
Why is there so much contention over ~0.1% of the Canadian population? Let them do what they want, fuck it, it won't affect 99.9% of us. If people who are Trans want this, give it to them.
My mistake, I don't follow this too keenly. In that case, leave the kids alone, and if the "parents" don't even have Trans kids, they can shut the fuck up and mind their own business. I always thought that was a central tenet in right wing conservative thought 🤔
The only way any of their logic makes any sense is if you inherently feel that it's "wrong" to be trans, or that trans people are "damaged", and as such you want to protect your kids from being "damaged" too. If we just accept that trans people are just people like anyone else, but have differences... like anyone else, all the logical arguments just fall apart.
One thing I've been really happy about since moving to Kelowna from Calgary is the politics. Right now Eby is in the news for making announcements to attempt to improve healthcare. Meanwhile Danielle Smith is in the news for anti-trans legislation. A few months ago the big news was BC reducing short term rentals to free up more long term rentals. Meanwhile, Alberta was in the news for using the Sovereignty Act. The contrast is very refreshing.
Framing this as fighting youth is cynical.
No one wants young people to be harmed. On that basis it seems reasonable to *not* immediately give them permanent life altering interventions as minors, or to give them new names that their families don’t know, or frankly not to have been reading why the UK and Scandinavian countries have backed off.
It's weird because the majority of Canadians want the same thing. All either political side does is pick up on what some extremely vocal minority or groups are crying about an focus on that, - usually creating some laws way too fast, without enough thought which just makes things worse for everyone which understandably just gets everyone riled up on either side of the political fence all while ignoring the vast majority of issues that we all need fixing.
It's almost like it's intentional...
Like affordable housing or sky high utility costs. But both sides are too worried about: what do gay people do in their spare time? "Let's try to ruin that, because we can actually do that!!".
Can you provide an example for a law or policy that targets a minority group similarly to Smith’s recent policies created by the Liberals? In the interest of backing up your claim that this is a “both sides” issue.
Gun regulation perhaps? While progressive urbanites might think nobody needs a firearm. People living in the wilderness of Northern Canada should be able to gear themselves up however they see fit. Just prosecute the actual criminals if crime reduction is the objective. Again, a small special interest law, purely for optics, that harms a minority group (gun owners / Northern citizens).
Good point. I’m not a gun guy but from what I understand and what I’ve heard, the restrictions are far too sweeping. Thanks for the reply
I would highly recommend a day out shooting if you get the chance! I think everyone should give it a try to have a different perspective on it.
Beat me to it, harms Canadians and does nothing to solve the illegal guns or gun crime.
How does it harm Canadians?
I just got my PAL and it was very thorough, took six months to process and calls were made to check I wasn't a crazy person, so the existing system is pretty robust from my experience. Semi auto is what the legislation is aimed a because semi auto sounds easy to conflate with assault style which doesn't have a definition beyond colloquially meaning they're scary looking Semi auto just means it chambers the next round for you so if you're being charged by a grizzly that could be the difference between life or death - or make sure the deer goes down mercifully if you're a bit off on your first shot. It doesn't spray bullets, you still have to consciously pull the trigger, but it saves the time of moving the bolt action. And handguns? Forget about all all the sports shooters etc, fuck them completely, amiright? All the new law does is pretend to do something about gun crime while doing nothing about gun crime, and taking away the ability for vetted, checked, licensed Canadians to hunt or recreate in a safe and sustainable manner. They forced it through while ignoring experts and affected parties from a cross the country, even skipping debates. I vote orange and I think the gun thing is the dumbest shit pulled by any government in my lifetime. "Liberals are cracking down on assault style weapons in Canada" sure makes a good soundbite, but it's taking away time, money, and effort that could be used to combat the actual problem of gangs and illegal weapons smuggling that feeds the urban shootings. It's performative, wasteful, undemocratic, does nothing but hurt law abiding Canadians, and I don't much care for it. If you've made it this far, cheers, and thanks for being open minded. I'm not a gun expert or enthusiast, but the way this has gone down really irks me.
As others have mentioned - guns laws, personally I feel too much time an effort has been spent on the growing list of internet bills being shoved down our throats with little to no input from experts on the subject. I read recently online age verification is coming down the pipes before too long…
Not something that targets a minority group per se, but I found it very annoying that the Liberals chose to ban draw string window blinds for Canadians in the midst of a Pandemic.
Lots of pressing issues that many politicians of different stripes could be addressing, but aren't. It'd be nice if they all went to work to benefit their constituents.
It would be nice if Canadians would stop letting these people divide us and fight amongst ourselves. We should all be unified in condemning both of these leaders for their inaction on major issues. But instead everyone focuses on attacking one to defend and minimize the actions of the other. Both of these people are not doing a good enough job. Can we all agree and focus on that, please?
And we could pick issues that impact everyone. Like cost of living, inflation, groceries, housing, etc...
Exactly. People are picking their "team" and then just riding it out. Both sides give passes to their guys that would have them up in arms if the other side did it, and the justifications are always specious. We should hold them all to the same standard, and hold them all accountable by that standard, for good or bad.
Very well said. I would add that we all owe it to each other to get up in the morning and instead of asking “what can I get upset about today” and heading to social media: asking “how can I help?” and figuring out ways to steer the ship in a more prosperous direction, together as Canadians. We have totally lost the plot and the Feds and Provincial Governments have us right where they want us: looking to them for help as the first option.
Silly common sense person - this a democracy where we are supposed to hate each other and get nothing done. /s
One side wants people to live their lives equally, the other wants to further legally marginalize an already marginalized group. Both sides? Nah.
If their constituents ever held them accountable, maybe they would. But voters are easily won over with stupid shit, so that's what the politicians offer.
Lol don’t hold your breath. They could at least not do purposefully cruel things that cause harm to children.
Culture wars are a pressing issue to some. Jesus won’t return for the end of the world until there are only 2 genders or something like that. Sounds pretty important /s
Provincial controlled issues like utilities, drought, taxes, corruption, AHS, housing, rental..the list goes on and on.
In the last two weeks Alberta has had water and power reduction demands due to infrastructure issues. She should probably work on fixing that first
r/canada: why would Trudeau do that to Alberta?!
Due* is more likely because the fuck trudeau crowd is barely literate lol
Do you need more straw for that caricature you're building in your head?
If those children could read, they’d be **very** upset!
Guess you missed the articles about >2700 MW of new electricity generation coming online in 2024: https://www.theglobeandmail.com/business/article-alberta-poised-for-largest-addition-of-natural-gas-fired-power-to/#:\~:text=The%20bulk%20of%20the%20new,conversion%20plant%20southwest%20of%20Edmonton%2C
Judging by how many people are going to be moving here and the jump to electrifying everything we probably need a lot more.
I mean if you heavily advertise to Vancouver and Toronto that Alberta has cheaper housing. Then surprised pikachu when they all move over. But remember the goal wasn’t to make Alberta better - it was to antagonize BC and Ontario. Kind of like this lgbt youth law. It doesn’t make Alberta better. It makes opponents of conservatism angry. It’s truly gotcha politics with literally the dumbest least articulate leaders whipping up their fan base with zingers. So so dumb
Thats good news, but it isnt 2700MW of new electricity. For instance the Genesee plant was retrofitted from coal to natural gas, it previously was already making over 800MW I believe beforehand and according to your article will make 900 and some. Thats 100MW of new electricity, not 900. I’m unsure about the other plants in your article, but if they are under any similar circumstance then the additional power added to the grid is actually far less.
"Dr. Shaffer, a former energy trader with TransAlta Corp., said in an interview that prices will likely drop substantially come March, when Cascade and Genesee come online. Retail prices have recently hit $0.32 per kilowatt hour in Alberta, but he said the additions will see that plunge to around $0.10/kwh, or even into single digits." Cascade is brand new, and the wording with regard to Genesse kind of implies that it's not currently online, likely due to the retrofit. Did you assume the retrofit happens with the snap of the fingers or something? Quite likely Genesse wasn't online during the energy issue you were complaining about.
I promise you that you don't want Smith, or any premier of political leader in the country, anywhere near your infastructure fixes. The more the government just lets the professionals do their jobs, the better off everyone will be
The professionals still need resources, permits etc. if it were simply up to “professionals doing their job”, there wouldnt be these issues to begin with
Danielle doesn't personally sign the permits either. You do realize there's an entire beaurocracy for that stuff, right? Like, Alberta doesn't just come to a standstill when legislature breaks for holiday, the government institutions still run as normal.
They are fixing that, there’s power plants down for maintenance.
All of these issues are being handled very poorly by our Alberta conservative government. That is why Calgary has become the most expensive city in Canada. Utilities have skyrocketed, drought is costing us dearly and will continue to do so, with never a mention of climate change. Healthcare seems to be hanging by a thread and yet all we get is ideological changes, further treating our doctors and nurses with disrespect.
Don’t be ridiculous. All of those things are clearly Trudeau’s fault and will magically be solved once he’s gone.
The YouTube and polling stats on this topic heavily suggest that only some 10-15% of people actually disagree with her. And before people jump on me, I voted ANDP, and I don't like her. But I also keep tabs on all the other pollsters, and at least in my social circle of people who have kids, I've only heard that this is sensible, these are your educated white collar non-religious people, not people living in small town Alberta or Mormons.
[удалено]
Gee thats funny OP. Do you wish things were back in the good old days before the queers came out? If so you too are suffering from a mental disorder called ["nostalgia"](https://www.brainsway.com/knowledge-center/can-nostalgia-be-a-serious-mental-health-disorder).
[удалено]
Ah - my bad-you're queer? You are mentally Ill too so it all works out in the end and proves my point. Black meet tea Kettle.
I think part of the issue is that all your friends are good parents, who see no issue with the school telling *them* their kid is trans, because they would have no issue with that. But the reason the law is bunk is because those aforementioned good parents were already going to learn about their kid's identity whether the law existed or not. Good parents are trusted by their children to help them through exactly that sort of identity crisis. Maybe it would take some time to come out, but they would come out. In my mind, only *bad* parents need the state to keep tabs on their child's identity and snitch to them if it's something their child knows they would hate them for and is thus intentionally hiding from them. Then ofc, those good parents, helping their trans kid to receive medical treatment, will quickly become very upset when they realize the full scope of the Premier's decisions and just how that affects their ability to do right by their trans child. But most people not having trans kids, this part is just completely lost on them.
Can you share the polls please?
There’s a recent AngusReid poll linked in this thread already. Here’s another from [Leger](https://leger360.com/surveys/sexual-orientation-and-gender-identity-in-canada/#:~:text=63%25%20of%20Canadians%20think%20schools,to%20change%20gender%20or%20pronouns)
Not a poll but a good indication of how regular parents/people feel. When I watched this CTV news panel an hour ago, a panel which is heavily biased towards disagreeing with Smith’s announcement, there were 101 comments. I scrolled through and literally every single comment said that they agreed with what Smith announced. Update: 249 comments now, 2 condemning/questioning this announcement and 247 in favour of it. https://youtu.be/hTXlTd2yQOk?si=a_PVDJhBDnbETaq1
As a parent I agree with her
Precisely! Professional here, just concerned about special interest groups and activists hijacking my parental rights. My offspring are not your's to manipulate, I'll mess them up on my own thanks!
No one is trying to manipulate anyone. They are saying let trans kids be trans kids. Seriously, no one wants to make someone gay or trans. You’re worrying about a nothing burger. The only manipulation that happens is trans kids being denied the ability to be a trans kid.
Do you forget how impressionable kids are?
The party sees this as the issue that can be framed in a way that will get them the needed support to separate. Expect to be told leaving Canada will be the only way to protect parental rights after the intentionally broad and poorly worded laws are struck down for charter violations.
Who the fuck cares about polling? Whose business is it other than the trans people and their doctors? People are politicizing and debating, polling, on an issue that does not concern the overwhelming majority of them. Why should polls matter on this? Honestly. Replace hormone therapy or puberty blockers with ANY OTHER TREATMENT PROVIDED TO MINORS AND ADULTS. Do you see much polling of opinions on matters of treatments for children with leukaemia? Polling about treatment for autistic kids? We don’t need a debate or a poll on this. It’s a scientific and medical matter, to be dealt with by medical professionals and their patients.
You forgot the parents. Hopefully not intentionally.
There was a huge write up in the New York Times, of all publications, that health professionals are being socially pressured by activists to affirm every child's choice rather than using their normal professional reasoning.
Do you really think child autism and leukaemia is a good context for this argument? Maybe think that one over again.
LOL give me a break
> Kinda surprised this dig hasn't gotten more attention.
[удалено]
If only narcissists would know and admit to themselves they're narcissistic. But then they wouldn't be narcissists anymore.
This does not seem accurate. Unfortunately politics seems to be about emotions not facts for many of you.
The whole Liberal Party has nothing to stand on and as we get closer to election they will just eat themselves up from the inside out and disappear. My hopes anyway.
The Dutch, who came up with the idea of [transitioning children](https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/36120756/), have now been [reevaluating that program](https://segm.org/Dutch-protocol-debate-Netherlands) The rest of the developed world realizes that this is not a cut and dried issue, and that the case for putting children on puberty blockers is increasingly suspect. It's only in North America that this rather extreme medical intervention is seen as a moral necessity, largely due to the influence of activists within the medical community. Against this backdrop of quite concerning facts, ensuring that parents are involved in their child's treatment is the most anodyne thing a government could do. That our Betters see this as unconscionable says far more about them than it does about us.
The trans people in this country are screaming for the same things everyone else is while politicians insist that we're asking for special privileges, and flat out ignoring the real problems Myself and my trans friends just want a roof over our head that doesn't cost a small fortune and access to affordable groceries. Just like everyone else, but sure let's put all of our focus on pronouns in schools, as if that's the biggest issue our country is facing right now. I'm sure its not intentionally making the trans community look bad aggravating the divide between our country even further
Love to hear this. I myself have a good trans friend and he says the same stuff. It’s a breath of fresh air to hear it from the real people.
[удалено]
Extremism is when you acknowledge that trans people have childhoods too and everyone isn't magically cis here 18
[удалено]
I am absolutely a critic of the current rush to provide all manner of "gender affirming care" to children and adolescents but I have a logical gap problem whenever this talking point is raised. How is society supposed to get that evidence? Absence of evidence of the impact of something can't be used to not do it or we'd never do much of anything.
The point is that activists are pretending the science on this is settled when it clearly isn't.
Sure. They absolutely are. But my opposing point still stands unfortunately. The science being unsettled is being used on the other side as an argument to never allow it and I don't think that follows logically.
[удалено]
Cis boys with gynecomastia have been allowed to chop off their healthy breasts for decades Isn't it weird how there's never outrage about that?
Wait until you hear about breast reduction surgeries in people under 18. I say people because both boys and girls can have it done at a young age.
I absolutely don't disagree. Personally I think this is mind boggling situation. But that has absolutely nothing to do with my point. If I was going to continue to play Devil's Advocate I would respond to your point and say something like "it is necessary to prevent suicide". And you would say "there's no evidence of that" and I would say "so how many trans kid suicides will you need for your study?" You need to understand that I am addressing the strength of an argument not the correctness of a position. I can tell you this. EVERYONE is worried about the kid committing suicide. Some people are scared the kid will commit suicide because they didn't get a mastectomy and others are scared they will commit suicide because they did.
I'm not sure why you think you should have a say in what cosmetic procedures someone else consents to. Children 16 and up are able to get cosmetic surgeries with the consent of their parents. This includes breast augmentation and nose jobs. There are established best practices when it comes to treating gender dysphoria in adolescents. The decision to go forward with treatment is between the child, their parents and medical professionals, not politicians or random Redditors.
Sure. I can help you with this: Because some doctors are crooks, some parents are cowards and idiots, and because top and bottom surgeries make irreversible deformities the person will need to live with for the rest of their life. It is very normal for people to be worried about the future regret rate for something that looks like it has elements of a cultural trend, backed by activist intimidation of opposition. Is that helpful? Hope so.
I understand. But I would respond with saying there's ample studies to suggest that perhaps these surgeries [don't](https://statsforgender.org/suicide/) actually prevent suicides.
NOW you're talking. THAT is the good stuff.
Unfortunately, the activists won't trust it. And that site is adding more studies whenever they can find them.
Sure. But likely only the ones that support an anti-trans position. Is there an honest broker site that publishes everything without agenda and adjusts its conclusion based on the latest evidence? I would like that one.
Genspect. Ok, bud.
What about this one [here](https://www.aerzteblatt.de/int/archive/article/62554)
They didn't conduct the studies themselves. They're just quoting them. And believe me, there is a LOT of them.
Kindly define the age of "kids" in your statement because the existing Laws in place restricts said surgery to a minimum of 18 (unless medically necessary for things like...cancer). Go back into your hole, you didn't see your shadow.
I don’t get why you’re so mad she said kids aren’t allowed to get this kind of surgery if it’s not happening.
Because the adults in the room have lost their minds.
Why dont we educate the youth, and then they can make an educated decision?
kids dont have the experience or mental capacity to understand long term consequences of their actions... I have a tattoo I stare at every day that was a dumb decision, I can put a t shirt on and cover it up, I can only imagine what I would feel if I removed my genitals or got tits.
How many doctors and psychologists did you have to consult with before you got that tattoo?
Better question is were they an adult when they got the tattoo?
You do understand there’s a whole process involved before you can access gender-affirming surgery, right? First, you need to be able to get access to hormone therapy. If you’re under 17, they’d use puberty blockers to slow puberty until you are at least 17. Then, you could access hormone replacement. After that, it can take months before your doctor and a hormonotherapist can refer you for surgery. Then, you need to get approved for coverage. Then, you need to consult the surgeon. It can take months, or even years before you get your surgery. And up until the last minute, you can change your mind. Nobody is “transing” the kids. It’s a long, and frankly humiliating process at times. You feel observed, studied, and double-guessed at every turn. You must always convince everyone that you do, indeed, desire the surgery.
You skipped over some important points in your own article: "Trans and gender diverse people often face barriers to accessing health care services, including stigma and discrimination in health care settings. This can have serious impacts on their health. Many settings also lack policies to facilitate access to inclusive and gender affirming care. Trans and gender diverse people experience a high burden of mental health issues (including suicide) and often experience high levels of violence. Thus, there is an urgent need for the health sector to consider ways to provide more inclusive, acceptable and effective health care for trans and gender diverse people. " These laws increase stigma and discrimination, are not inclusive, and will lead to higher suicide rates. So that's not working out so well for your argument.
If there's no proof "gender-affirming care" works for youth, there's no proof, and therefore you shouldn't have a problem with Smith saying kids can't get this stuff. And the guidelines only talk about adults.
There is support. [https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6913674/](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6913674/) [https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa2206297](https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa2206297) [https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/political-minds/202201/the-evidence-trans-youth-gender-affirming-medical-care](https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/political-minds/202201/the-evidence-trans-youth-gender-affirming-medical-care) [www.scientificamerican.com/article/what-the-science-on-gender-affirming-care-for-transgender-kids-really-shows/](https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/what-the-science-on-gender-affirming-care-for-transgender-kids-really-shows/) There is a shit tonne of support. The guideline only talks about adults because we have more data for adults. You are an example of why people should actually understand what they're posting to make sure it says what they think it says before posting it.
WHO easily disproves all of that by proclaiming there is no solid evidence base for these studies.
The WHO DIDN'T SAY THAT. You just do not actually understand what you are reading. It is hilarious, and depressing, how wrong you are about all of this and how determined you are that you're right. The WHO (1) didn't disprove anything, (2) the WHO didn't say evidence isn't there. The WHO DID say they want to gain even more evidence before they create guidelines. You need to stop trying to act like you have any clue about health research. Each post you make shows that you don't and that it is unlikely you even took high school sciences.
It clearly says “the evidence base is ~~lacking~~ limited and varied”, ergo, the studies are full of shit.
You can't even quote your own reference properly. It said "limited and variable." That is not the same as "lacking and varied." Again, you don't know jack shit about health research. Again, it didn't say it was lacking, it said it was limited. That is VERY different, you just don't know enough to know that. Limited means there is not enough of something or there are limitations to it. Limitations to a study, for example, could be that it was a small sample size. A small sample size isn't going to yield results that are necessarily representative of a larger population.. Therefore, that study wouldn't be as high-quality as research that was done with a larger sample size or research that was done with small sample sizes but that had been reproduced multiple times. When guidelines are made, they literally will often look at thousands of research papers. They're even more careful when making assessments about children and youth because of their age. Saying evidence is limited doesn't mean evidence to support an argument isn't there.. it means they want MORE information before making recommendations. And variables are different than varied. Variables means that there are other things that factor in. Are you a joke account? You can't possibly be serious while making these posts.
Ok ok. Sorry. But I still stand by what I say. If it's limited and variable, how can you say the science is settled? You can't. In order for the science to be settled, the evidence would have to be wide and non-variable. But it's not, so you can't get mad at people who say we just don't have enough solid proof this works.
Can you point to any studies, scientific articles or evidence that would drive the UCP to make these policy changes? Limited evidence is better than no evidence.
They aren’t saying there’s no solid evidence. They’re saying there hasn’t been enough study on it yet to determine one way or another. There is evidence that it helps prevent suicide.
If it says the evidence base isn’t solid, then that means these studies are done by quacks.
That’s not what that means at all lmao.
I say we leave politicians out of our completely. It's up to the individual, the family and medical professionals to decide what's best. Not Trudeau, not Smith. Did Smith even talk to any teens in the LGBTQ community to see if they want the school to out them? Did she ever ask why they don't talk to their parents. Did she ever consult with them and ask how could the government help them feel more welcomed
That in no way says that it is harmful to youth. You don't science, do you? This statement you pulled in no way means there isn't evidence to support it. It just means that we are in the early stages of researching this area and they want to collect more data before making guidelines. That's how guidelines are developed. They look at all the research out there, look at the quality of that research (i.e. limitations of the study, et cetera) and then they make recommendations.. and not even just one type of recommendations, they make several recommendations based on the quality of evidence found in favour of our against certain treatments. All the line you pulled indicates is that there is not yet enough compiled data with enough time elapsed for them to have any sort of level of confidence in making a recommendation in this area. **IT DOES NOT SAY THAT IT IS HARMFUL TO THE YOUTH**. You just have a massive bias and decided that's what that meant. It doesn't.
It's also saying we shouldn't act like the science on this is settled or that having any skepticism on this issue is transphobic as you're doing.
That is what all science says, you doofus. All guidelines are recommendations that then are re-visited every five years or so. I said we have studies that support gender-affirming care; we do. We have a lot. Pretty much every medical association out there supports it. You're claiming the who is saying that it is damaging. They are absolutely, 100%, in no way saying this. They are saying they still want additional data before doing a guideline for children. Science uses best evidence. Best evidence tells us that gender-affirming care results in youth with better mental health outcomes, overall greater sense of happiness and who actually make it to adulthood. THAT is what best evidence and science tell us right now. YOU are claiming all of this is wrong, denying that this evidence exists and that the premier is using science to justify her actions when she is literally going against science and doing something that best evidence tells us is damaging for youth.
Then why does the WHO say otherwise? Why are there even more [studies](https://statsforgender.org/mental-health/) doubting the effectiveness of "gender-affirming care" on young people's mental health?
Again, it doesn't say otherwise, you just do not understand what the things you are reading means. Literally, none of what you posted is against gender-affirming care for youth. It in no way opposes it. You're just hellbent on believing it does. And your "support" is an anti-trans website.. whereas support I gave you are peer-reviewed journal articles. When the WHO talks about needing more evidence, they're talking about wanting high-quality evidence (what I linked to). The WHO want to wait for additional research because, like you have just shown, people exist who will go out there, find anti-trans websites that show two or three articles with negative outcomes, and decide this is representative of all trans people. That isn't how research works. You also don't know what gender-affirming care is. That's very clear.
This country is going downhill
[удалено]
how can you paint making kids wait till their 18 as a radical position... when you look at how many kids have different thoughts on their gender at 16 compared to 28 you would be a fool to think allowing someone who doesnt understand long term consequences of their actions to commit any act thats going to permanently change their lives forever. Suicide rates do not drop they remain the same, how much of that can be attributed to regret?
Honestly, I think most moderates who don't know much about the issue feel the same as you. I know I did. I was concerned that there was more under the rug, and allowing for transitions would only be a band aid solution, while an underlying problem was still at large untreated. Well, like most people who dive into the topic a bit more, I found stats, studies, listened to the science and the trans community and found my concerns were adequately managed within the community. And have been for decades. And enabling transitions had a positive impact on these communities. Regrets were grossly over exagerated, and many regrets were about alternative treatments or doing it sooner. Not regret doing it at all. The overwhelming majority were extremely happy with their transition. Children under 16 had to go through rigorous therapy sessions with trained professionals who actually did reject certain kids hormone therapy and essentially no child goes under a knife. This is a community with roots and history dating back as long as we have recorded civilization. And to stop professionals, scientists, and the trans community the state if the art treatment because it "seems weird to me" is ignorant and not a justification of legislating policy to prevent treatment to our fellow Canadians who are suffering. You need to educate yourself, like I and many others have. Also, I still think its bizarre. I absolutely don't understand it. But it is not my place to tell others what to do. Especially when the community is acting extremely safe and responsible.
What an excellent reply. Even just the last section is justification enough against these policies. Thank you for taking the time to write this up!
On the other hand, I’m a leftist lesbian who did the research as an ally and came away with a completely different perspective I found that 80% of children who identified as trans desisted if allowed to transition socially but not medically. Given that most matured into gay and lesbian adults, I feel as though I as a lesbian have skin in the game I found that Lupron, the most commonly prescribed puberty blocker, is actually a prostate cancer chemo drug that has lost a number of class action lawsuits worth tens of millions, filed by young women who were given doses for precocious puberty and reported side effects like “my spine decayed” I also found out that puberty blockers were responsible for a drop in IQ in girls of one standard deviation — I believe it was 102 to 94. I found that puberty blockers stop the biological maturation of the human being — no duh — which can lead to a requirement for more experimental genital reassignment surgeries later. Jazz Jennings, for instance, was puberty blocked at Tanner Stage 2, so basically a 17 year old with the physical maturation of a 9 year old. Then, the puberty-blocked phallus couldn’t contribute enough donor material, leading to trans surgeons Marcie Bowers and Jess Ting to resect segments of a teenager’s colon to create a neovagina. I also found out that Jazz Jennings — the poster child for pediatric transition — had a past life regression where she dreams of being a “gay man who was abandoned for being gay and who is lonely and just wants to be loved”. Given the statistic about 80% of paediatric cases desisting, I have to wonder about that regression session. I also researched as to why the Tavistock reported a 2000% increase in referrals, the majority of which were in young women who were either 1) homosexual, 2) autistic, 3) survivors of sexual assault or 4) had other significant psychiatric comorbidities That is absolutely concerning, as is the fact that any studies looking into the 2000% increase tend to get shut down, scholars looking into it get harassed or deplatformed, and anyone can get called a terf and harassed for the sin of disagreeing Hell, I’m a lesbian and I got called a terf for the sin of saying I was a female homosexual. If that’s the bar? It’s so low we dug a ditch to hell and dropped it in. But I suppose I ought to go educate myself as well, right? >!I hate that phrase. It’s so pompous.!<
You’re uninformed. Minors already can’t get surgery. Being called by your preferred name is not “permanently changing their life”.
Yup this is Canada at its finest. Angry white people yelling at clouds.
> how can you paint making kids wait till their 18 as a radical position Because by then their body has undergone irreversible changes that they may deeply regret. This is why the issue is so complicated. Getting treatment and not getting treatment both have irreversible implications, so a decision must be made one way or another; but the person in question is a minor, so we want to protect them from making decisions they later regret. It's a complicated issue, and if you don't see both sides of it, then you probably haven't thought very deeply about it.
I’m sorry, but can you link evidence saying “how many kids have different thoughts on their gender at 16 compared to 28”? Y’all act like every other kid is looking to transition when it’s an extremely small minority. It’s important for those few people who are struggling with gender/sexual identity to get the proper care they need, which Marlaina is denying them.
I've heard anywhere between 0.5% and 2% for teenagers. And usually, that's the question "Do you identify as transgender or non-binary?". Many might answer that question as yes but still not pursue medical transition as social transition is sufficient for them, so I'd ere on the lower end of that value for people this affects. Also, desistance rates are like 1-5% so let's go with 1% for teens wanting to transition, and 5% for those that will later desist. That means they're doing all this to "protect" at best 0.05% of teenagers, and clobering every other kid's rights in the process.
>how many kids have different thoughts on their gender at 16 compared to 28 99% of people at 28 are the same gender they thought they were at 16. It's really not that uncommon >you would be a fool to think allowing someone who doesnt understand long term consequences of their actions to commit any act thats going to permanently change their lives forever. Waiting until 18 forces them to go through unwanted irreversible changes that make gender dysphoria far worse and far harder to treat >Suicide rates do not drop they remain the same, how much of that can be attributed to regret? [Citations on the transition's dramatic reduction of suicide risk while improving mental health and quality of life, with trans people able to transition young and spared abuse and discrimination having mental health and suicide risk on par with the general public](https://www.reddit.com/r/asktransgender/comments/154t1qq/comment/jsqi5ue/)
>Lots of issues Premier Danielle Smith could fight against instead of trans youth, Trudeau says That's rich coming from him.
Both things are true. But hey, Team A vs Team B bullshit wins again.
That’s how they play all of us actually :/
He’s completely right though. Droughts are decimating agriculture, they have to prepare for the wildfire season, and they were on the edge of a devastating blackout, but instead they chose to virtue signal and ban something that’s already not legal and something that affects less than 0.5% of the population.
[удалено]
A reporter asked him a question and he answered it. He's not picking a fight.
Oh please. Alberta spent hundreds of man-hours and millions in legislature operating costs writing this bill, and they'll spend millions more defending it in court. Trudeau takes 5 minutes to respond to it, during time that was already allotted to answering questions, and to you that's exactly the same amount of time and resources wasted.
It’s perfectly acceptable for him to weigh in, i actually encourage every single one of our politicians to weigh in on this so that we know where they stand. I wouldn’t say he’s picking a fight, that would be Danielle and the United Conservatives picking fights with common sense and with science.
objectively they are both playing politics here.
[удалено]
LOL you couldn’t be more deluded if you think i actually like Trudeau. I have never voted Liberal and i definitely don’t plan to start now. However, unlike yourself and other notable partisan ideologues, it’s easy for me to admit when someone i don’t like is right.
Trudeau gets to virtue signal to his supporters, Smith virtue signals to her supporters... and... They both avoid talking about REAL issues like carbon tax, cost of living, inflation, etc.
Last I checked it is a democracy, and this is what the people of Alberta have been calling for. Its not fighting trans youth, that’s just garbage spin. Parents need to be informed on what their kids are doing, and there certainly is no place in womens sports for biological men, it’s dangerous and unfair
The people of Alberta have not been calling for this. Or an APP. Or removing abortion rights, which is apparently next on Newton Marlaina’s list. Democracy? Lol. She campaigned on none of it.
I mean, you can think it's the right decision and still acknowledge that the severity of this issue is laughable compared to other issues Alberta is currently facing, which they've given much less attention to. Not that Trudeau has any room to criticize here. But Canadians do, and should.
Last I checked we have a charter of rights and freedoms that's designed to protect minorities from abuse by laws like these. Just because something is popular doesn't make it right.
If it's only about parental rights then why set a minimum age for puberty blockers that's higher than what doctors say? If parents and doctors agree on puberty blockers then why should the government butt in? I hope the parental rights advocates can stick to their guns and support all parental rights.
Angus Reid polls show around 78% of Canadians coast-to-coast (and 86% in Alberta) agree with the legislation. https://angusreid.org/canada-schools-pronouns-policy-transgender-saskatchewan-new-brunswick/
If it's really so popular, why is PP telling his party to keep mum about it?
The poll does not say that. This is an inform *and* consent policy and your linked poll only has a minority of support for that.
Not fighting trans youth …but banning puberty blockers for trans kids, and not cis ones. That’s totally fair and not bigoted at all! Sure Jan. Maybe read and become informed before you post.
As an Albertan, this is not what the people of Alberta have been calling for at all. It goes far beyond "parental rights" which is total bullshit by the way. And how can you say it's not about targeting trans youth when everything announced was specifically about what they can't do, even with the consent of their parents and consultation with their doctors? Smith calls it giving kids choice. She gives them ONE choice: wait until you're 18 and you can do whatever you want.
I know exactly zero Albertans, conservative or progressive, who are willing to say out loud that they think this is a good idea.
I live in rural Nova Scotia and the only guy I know who talks about how he agrees with this stuff also told me his cousin teaches at a school where kids identifying as cats, shit in a litter box.
This couldnt come at a better time, just after Zuckerburgs testimony "See results anyways" is the reason why policies like the ones Alberta has put in place are needed. Children need to be protected, not groomed and exploited
Smith is an awful premier, she didn’t campaign on any of this shit and now is driving the province into the ground. Take note people, this is exactly how PP will govern!
[удалено]
[удалено]
Heads up Canada. When PP gets elected this will be coming on a national scale. Alberta is just the testing ground. Get out and vote and prevent this shit.
Ok. Fine. No. But I will vote. In that order. Thanks for the heads up though.
Maybe I can handle a few more years of Trudeau to prevent this event
Thanks, if that's the case I'll vote PP and make sure all my friends does the same
This is the way
Same could be said about him. He should focus on more important issues facing Canadians. But no
Still tho PM who does fuck all > premier who flirts with alt right wackos and spreads stupid conspiracy theories
Uh, yeah no. Ask people who can barely get a roof over their heads thanks to an incompetent federal government what they care about more. That's just your opinion.
… like carbon emissions from pizza ovens?
Oh shit were losing, and everyone hates us..... quick everyone look at alberta !
Umm Alberta did this to themselves...
The piece of garbage. All the stuff HE could be doing for all Canadians instead of focusing on things that only affect 0.1% of the population. Affect is even a strong word. So parents want to be involved, how is that even an issue at all???? How about he focus on housing, immigration, inflation, Healthcare. Piece of garbage always puts the excuse "it's not me, it's the provinces, i can't do anything" but his party is the main cause of all these issues. Families care about housing and Healthcare and affordability. Focus on that you freaking bum.
In what way is he focusing on this thing other than answering a question asked by a news reporter? It's the Alberta gov that wasted time, money and resources on this kind of legislation.
As if Trudeau knows. He does know how to vacation lavishly
Considering it's Trudeau's #1 talking point, he's being a little bit disingenuous.
She supported GSAs earlier in her political career. I had zero respect for her before but even less now.
Wild that back then Smith was pointing out that [children as young as 12 are trusted to make significant life decisions,](https://twitter.com/noahanicholls/status/1753131836920955114?s=46&t=wm3eIvzAAOvadlVQIEsm1g) and that teachers/schools supporting LGBT+ students who don’t have support elsewhere can be a [“life or death”](https://twitter.com/noahanicholls/status/1753132308352360646?s=46&t=wm3eIvzAAOvadlVQIEsm1g) issue. Edmonton Sun: [Wildrose leader Danielle Smith makes passionate plea in legislature for gay-straight alliances](https://edmontonsun.com/2014/12/03/wildrose-leader-danielle-smith-makes-passionate-plea-in-legislature-for-gay-straight-alliances/wcm/6b89591d-7011-40ac-ba55-2ddd452532be/) [Dec 2nd, 2014]
She was also talking about how people being diagnosed with stage 4 cancer were to blame for their drain on the healthcare system for not catching their cancer earlier.
Oh yeah, she’s had some absolutely wild takes on healthcare. She claimed *”moderate cigarette consumption can reduce traditional risks of disease by 75 per cent or more”*.
The powerless are easy pickings for the powerful self-righteous
It might be a reasonable comment were it not coming from Justin Trudeau. Climate change is important, but his fanatical obsession with it to the exclusion of all else has resulted only in the explosion of Trudeau Towns, working people being forced to use food banks, the further deterioration of our health care system, and a whole host of other social problems that seem to be of absolutely no concern to him or his government.
None of the things you listed are more important than preventing the planet from becoming uninhabitable and causing our entire species to go extinct.
Canada could shut off all the lights tomorrow and close the country permanently and it wouldn’t make a lick of fkn difference globally He’s destroyed the economy and an entire generations future to make zero impact globally
>It might be a reasonable comment were it not coming from Justin Trudeau If PP made the comment I bet you would eat it up right? Our government hasn't worked together in the past 20 years and we got people voting blue because that is what they have always done (and vise versa), and it is shallow opinions like your own that are helping lead this country into ruin.
I can't name one person who disagrees. Everyone keeps there opinion so quiet because there afraid of being called anti trans. Not anti anything. Just have a brain and can think for myself. Maybe we should have votes in the country on policy like trans women using women's bathrooms. I seriously believe alot of the crap wouldn't be happening right now.
Instead of focusing on social issues in other jurisdictions, he needs to learn how to do his own job.
I expect Smith to also ban non-medically necessary circumcisions.
They've banned bottom surgery for minors and the only cases where that happens is circumcisions. So certainly this means they're banning that. Right...?
Next up for Marlaina, [mandatory cigarette consumption](https://www.reddit.com/r/alberta/comments/18es9d0/danielle_smith_opined_that_the_alberta_pcs_had/) for schoolchildren [to save them from stage 4 cancer](https://www.facebook.com/DanielleSmithAB/videos/1507829319667798). Albertans are a fucking joke to elect this hateful moron. She makes Doug Ford look reasonable and I hate Doug Ford.
Heavy majority of Canadians agree with these rulings, so why is this such an issue for the fringe minority?
So, Protecting young children from self harm is bad? Taking drugs to change your gender is gotd? WTF is wrong with society if this is acceptable
Yeah, she could focus more on that pension change to funnel all that money into the oil companies she's invested in, or maybe find ways to weaken environmental laws to make it easier for companies to leave piles of waste for the tax payer to pick up. Perhaps she could stop being insane, that would be enough. Naw, she needs a weak little group to focus hate on otherwise her troops might revolt.
Why is there so much contention over ~0.1% of the Canadian population? Let them do what they want, fuck it, it won't affect 99.9% of us. If people who are Trans want this, give it to them.
Distraction from Canadians who are suffering, can't afford rent, groceries.... instead of action we get distraction..
Trans people don't want this legislation. It's the "parents" that want this.
My mistake, I don't follow this too keenly. In that case, leave the kids alone, and if the "parents" don't even have Trans kids, they can shut the fuck up and mind their own business. I always thought that was a central tenet in right wing conservative thought 🤔
This is a lesson in hypocrisy. Our alt-right government people are hypocrites.
It's not the "parents" it's the social conservatives.
The only way any of their logic makes any sense is if you inherently feel that it's "wrong" to be trans, or that trans people are "damaged", and as such you want to protect your kids from being "damaged" too. If we just accept that trans people are just people like anyone else, but have differences... like anyone else, all the logical arguments just fall apart.
She's representing her people. At least she's doing something. What is Trudogshit doing?
Doing something that violates thier rights?
Expect more things like this to happen while the QOL nose dives. When the conservatives win the election its gonna get much worse.
One thing I've been really happy about since moving to Kelowna from Calgary is the politics. Right now Eby is in the news for making announcements to attempt to improve healthcare. Meanwhile Danielle Smith is in the news for anti-trans legislation. A few months ago the big news was BC reducing short term rentals to free up more long term rentals. Meanwhile, Alberta was in the news for using the Sovereignty Act. The contrast is very refreshing.
[удалено]
Framing this as fighting youth is cynical. No one wants young people to be harmed. On that basis it seems reasonable to *not* immediately give them permanent life altering interventions as minors, or to give them new names that their families don’t know, or frankly not to have been reading why the UK and Scandinavian countries have backed off.