Thread: TV personality Mario Lopez in hot water over "insensitive" remarks

https://edition.cnn.com/2019/07/31/e...rnd/index.html

"Mario Lopez apologizes for 'ignorant' comments about parenting and gender identity"



The nerve of that Mario Lopez! And he's STILL allowed on television? Some heads should roll for this. His apology is not enough, I'm afraid. He should damn be burned at the stake for his awful comments. The stake I tell ya!!

Here is the quote from the article:

The former "Saved By the Bell" star made the remarks last month on a podcast hosted by conservative personality Candace Owens.
In the discussion, Owens brings up what she calls one of the "weird trends" of Hollywood parents allowing their children to pick their gender identity.
Though she is not a parent herself, Owens said "I nannied for five years of my life" and does not believe that children have the "mental authority" to make such decisions.
In response, Lopez asked Owens "please don't lump me into" the group of Hollywood parents of which she was speaking.
"I'm kind of blown away too," he said. "Look, I'm never one to tell anyone how to parent their kids, obviously, and I think if you come from a place of love, you really can't go wrong. But at the same time, my God, if you're 3 years old and you're saying you're feeling a certain way, or you think you're a boy or a girl, whatever the case may be, I just think it's dangerous as a parent to make that determination."
He added, "It's sort of alarming and, my gosh, I just think about the repercussions later on."


To be fair, he WAS sort of egged on by Candace Owens.... so she should be burned on the stake next to his.

Opinions such as these are totally unacceptable!

a transgender 3 year old is like a vegan cat. we all know who's making the lifestyle choices

Mario Lopez apology

"The comments I made were ignorant and insensitive, and I now have a deeper understanding of how hurtful they were," Lopez said in a statement to CNN. "I have been and always will be an ardent supporter of the LGBTQ community, and I am going to use this opportunity to better educate myself. Moving forward I will be more informed and thoughtful."

I didn't understand why his comments were "offensive" so took his advice about educating ourselves.


Mario Lopez's comments about transgender kids aren't just dumb. They're dangerous.

The conversations on Owens’ radio show (or in the pages of the Guardian) would have audiences believe that 4-year-old children are waking up one day, declaring a new gender and then undergoing surgical interventions the next day. This narrative is blatantly untrue — and also deliberately contrived to stoke fears of trans people and build support for a growing anti-trans movement in the United States and the United Kingdom.

The reality is much more nuanced.

What is true is that children grow and develop every day in thousands of ways. A 3-year-old is different than a 3½-year-old, and incredibly different from a 10-year-old. As parents, we know that each month brings new developments because we track our children’s development month-by-month. The idea, then, that parents and medical professionals would treat the development of all trans and gender-nonconforming children from ages 2 to 18 exactly the same way betrays the absurdity of the critique from the outset.

Supporting a child’s gender identity and expression is not the same as telling a child that they can be a truck or a dog — a favorite, and offensive, comparison of anti-trans commentators. Children who express a gender different from the gender assigned to them at birth do so in persistent and consistent ways over many months and years.

And being supporting does not mean taking your preschooler in for surgery: No young child is receiving medical intervention of any kind before puberty and no one is receiving surgery until the age of 18 (except in some limited circumstances, where chest surgery might be available around age 16). What children are supposed to receive is a loving and affirming caretaker who can reflect back to them that they are beautiful and loved, no matter what.

https://www.nbcnews.com/think/opinio...6?icid=related

So the kids can't have the chop until they're 18-years-old, regardless of what age the gender swap thingy is chosen/discovered (not sure what's appropriate).

Am I the only one who thought they were chopping and changing littleuns? Doesn't sound so mental having to wait until they become adults to get surgery.

Who fucking cares , people can have opinions.
Why does this mad world think that everyone should like everyone else.

Originally Posted by TitoFan

https://edition.cnn.com/2019/07/31/e...rnd/index.html

"Mario Lopez apologizes for 'ignorant' comments about parenting and gender identity"



The nerve of that Mario Lopez! And he's STILL allowed on television? Some heads should roll for this. His apology is not enough, I'm afraid. He should damn be burned at the stake for his awful comments. The stake I tell ya!!

Here is the quote from the article:

The former "Saved By the Bell" star made the remarks last month on a podcast hosted by conservative personality Candace Owens.
In the discussion, Owens brings up what she calls one of the "weird trends" of Hollywood parents allowing their children to pick their gender identity.
Though she is not a parent herself, Owens said "I nannied for five years of my life" and does not believe that children have the "mental authority" to make such decisions.
In response, Lopez asked Owens "please don't lump me into" the group of Hollywood parents of which she was speaking.
"I'm kind of blown away too," he said. "Look, I'm never one to tell anyone how to parent their kids, obviously, and I think if you come from a place of love, you really can't go wrong. But at the same time, my God, if you're 3 years old and you're saying you're feeling a certain way, or you think you're a boy or a girl, whatever the case may be, I just think it's dangerous as a parent to make that determination."
He added, "It's sort of alarming and, my gosh, I just think about the repercussions later on."


To be fair, he WAS sort of egged on by Candace Owens.... so she should be burned on the stake next to his.

Opinions such as these are totally unacceptable!

What next. If someone calls a person coyote ugly, they have to recant, repent and say they meant bittersweet eye candy?

Originally Posted by Dark Lord Al

Who fucking cares , people can have opinions.
Why does this mad world think that everyone should like everyone else.

Mental isn't it?

Outside this forum I don't know anyone who gives a monkey's about gays/LGBT/trans or any of this stuff.

Originally Posted by Dark Lord Al

Who fucking cares , people can have opinions.
Why does this mad world think that everyone should like everyone else.

Precisely. Who fucking cares?

Which begs the question as to why Mario Lopez felt compelled (or pressured) to apologize to begin with.

Originally Posted by Fenster

Mario Lopez apology

"The comments I made were ignorant and insensitive, and I now have a deeper understanding of how hurtful they were," Lopez said in a statement to CNN. "I have been and always will be an ardent supporter of the LGBTQ community, and I am going to use this opportunity to better educate myself. Moving forward I will be more informed and thoughtful."

I didn't understand why his comments were "offensive" so took his advice about educating ourselves.


Mario Lopez's comments about transgender kids aren't just dumb. They're dangerous.

The conversations on Owens’ radio show (or in the pages of the Guardian) would have audiences believe that 4-year-old children are waking up one day, declaring a new gender and then undergoing surgical interventions the next day. This narrative is blatantly untrue — and also deliberately contrived to stoke fears of trans people and build support for a growing anti-trans movement in the United States and the United Kingdom.

The reality is much more nuanced.

What is true is that children grow and develop every day in thousands of ways. A 3-year-old is different than a 3½-year-old, and incredibly different from a 10-year-old. As parents, we know that each month brings new developments because we track our children’s development month-by-month. The idea, then, that parents and medical professionals would treat the development of all trans and gender-nonconforming children from ages 2 to 18 exactly the same way betrays the absurdity of the critique from the outset.

Supporting a child’s gender identity and expression is not the same as telling a child that they can be a truck or a dog — a favorite, and offensive, comparison of anti-trans commentators. Children who express a gender different from the gender assigned to them at birth do so in persistent and consistent ways over many months and years.

And being supporting does not mean taking your preschooler in for surgery: No young child is receiving medical intervention of any kind before puberty and no one is receiving surgery until the age of 18 (except in some limited circumstances, where chest surgery might be available around age 16). What children are supposed to receive is a loving and affirming caretaker who can reflect back to them that they are beautiful and loved, no matter what.

https://www.nbcnews.com/think/opinio...6?icid=related

Kudos on wanting to educate yourself on the matter. Funny though, how it's ok to reference and quote an article written by a trans activist...... but it's somehow naive to reference and quote an article written by a religious objector. Seems "double-standardish" to me.... you know?

So I myself went to a different type of source, one that looks at medical issues through the very real prism of economics.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/julianv.../#76ca2ca77161


I found a little "education", if you will, of my own:


"One example of this is in the UK, where doctors within the country’s national health system (the NHS) have in recent months have critiqued their experiences at the only clinic specialized in transgender medicine for children within the country. Last year, the governor of the Tavistock and Portman Foundation NHS Foundation Trust, Marcus Evans, accused the management of the clinic of having an “overvalued belief in” the expertise of its branch devoted to gender identity, the Gender Identity Development Service (GIDS). Evans further accused the trust of “dismiss[ing] challenge and examination.” Then this spring, five clinicians at the Tavistock Centre which is run by the Gender Identity Development Service (GIDS) allege that this center has been approving “life-changing medical intervention” on children and adolescents “without sufficient evidence of its long-term effects” citing feeling pressured to refer young people for life-altering treatments. There have been at least 18 staff members who have resigned in similar protest over the past three years from the GIDS. In response to these resignations, Carl Heneghan, director of the Centre of Evidence-based Medicine at the University of Oxford, told the Times: “Given paucity of evidence, the off-label use of drugs [for outcomes not covered by the medicine’s license] in gender dysphoria treatment largely means an unregulated live experiment on children.”

Earlier this month, Dr Kirsty Entwistle, a former clinician who worked at the Leeds’ GIDS, detailed how clinicians have been fearful around their work in diagnosing children for fear of being labelled “transphobic.” In her open letter to Polly Carmichael, the director of GIDS, Entwistle wrote:

I think it is a problem that GIDS clinicians are making decisions that will have a major impact on children and young people’s bodies and on their lives, potentially the rest of their lives, without a robust evidence base. GIDS clinicians tell children and families that puberty blockers/hormone blocks are “fully reversible” but the reality is no one knows what the impacts are on children’s brains so how is it possible to make this claim? It is also a problem that GIDS clinicians are afraid of raising their concerns for fear of being labelled transphobic by colleagues.

Echoing Entwistle’s assertions this week, Michael Biggs, an associate professor in the Department of Sociology at the University of Oxford, published “The Tavistock’s Experiment with Puberty Blockers” [1] where he analyzes the devastating reality behind GIDS’ treatment of children through the administration of puberty blockers (triptorelin). Biggs demonstrates how Carmichael vastly misrepresented the safety and efficacy of these puberty blockers and avoided publishing the results of a study which examined the use of puberty blockers on these very children. Biggs writes, “The failure to fully publish the results of the experiment—for all 44 children given triptorelin, on all the outcomes that the study measured—suggests that it was a pretext to administer unlicensed drugs rather than an attempt to acquire scientific knowledge.” Biggs shows the links between parent advocacy for the medicalization of their children and the suppression of the negative results of Carmichael’s study which she also misrepresented to the media. He also demonstrates the myriad financial conflicts of interest at the heart of this trust’s practices while maintaining that GIDS is carrying out experimental treatment on adolescents driven in large part by advocacy groups like Mermaids.

What we are facing today is a crisis in medicine and the biotech sector where the demand for treatments and medicines is often being advocated by the patient and patient advocacy groups who are emotionally invested in a certain outcome, regardless of safety or medical wisdom. While sympathy with those suffering from various conditions is warranted, we need to ensure that medical and research establishments are not hijacked by lobby groups who just want doctors to do as they command."

What a pussy

Originally Posted by El Kabong

What a pussy

https://www.inquisitr.com/5559747/ma...report-claims/

Who is Candace Owens