May 19, 2008
Tibet Protesters Protest, Transgendered Get Health Coverage, And Russia Gets Back At Us For '72
Tibet supporters demonstrated outside the Chinese consulate in Toronto yesterday, marching with the Tibetan Freedom Torch, which is supposed to be the symbolic opposite to the Olympic torch. Which doesn't make sense, because how can a torch be the opposite of another torch? Shouldn't it have been a large bowl of water instead?
The Victoria Day weekend produced record fatalities, with eight dead as of Sunday night. The OPP stated that they were not amused.
A Canadian girl married Peter Phillips, the only son of Princess Anne. Peter Phillips has no actual title and is a fairly distant eleventh in line to the British throne. Torontoist presents this extremely boring nonstory as evidence of how far Canadian newspapers will go to make news out of the fact that a Canadian did something, anything, somewhere other than Canada.
Ontario Health Minister George Smitherman announced that OHIP will soon cover sex-change operations again, ten years after the Mike Harris government took it off the books. And then, the heads of those on the Toronto Sun's editorial board all exploded.
Finally, Russia beat Canada in overtime to win the World Hockey Championship. But they probably cheated, because everyone knows that all Russians are vodka-drinking ex-communists.
Photo by arcticlamb from the Torontoist Flickr Pool.
|
But they probably cheated, because everyone knows that all Russians are vodka-drinking ex-communists.
More probably we didn't cheat enough, because everyone knows that all Canadians are polite, beer-swilling socialists. We're really not all that different :)
Having OHIP pay for sex-changes is absolutely insane. It shows just how extreme our society's attitude of political correctness has came when dental work isn't covered but this variant of plastic surgery is. When it comes to a sausagectomy or a pipe fitting, people should pay for their own unnecessary surgery.
8–10 operations per year at an approximate cost of $150,00–200,000 annually? Doesn't sound like that big of a deal, especially compared to how much money things like smoking-related treatment costs the province ($1.7 billion) or obesity-related health treatment ($1.6 billion).
For many transgendered people, gender reassignment surgery isn't "unnecessary," and they have to go through an extensive, lengthy medical and psychological evaluation process before they are even granted permission.
I'm not criticizing the policy on an economic level. I am against it by principle, using a small amount of tax payer money incorrectly is just as wrong as wasting millions.
I knew you would object to my use of the word "unnecessary", so I'll qualify myself. It's unnecessary because it isn't a matter of life or death; they could live, albeit unhappily without it. They don't need a sex change, they want a sex change. If we pay for this I don't see why we shouldn't also fit the bill for breast implants and nose jobs.
Pickletoes, using your reasoning there's no reason OHIP should cover any mental health issues at all. After all, the depressed and bipolar can function - they just won't be happy.
The thing is, as a society we recognize that spending the money to cover their mental health care is cheaper in the long run than letting them degrade into useless wrecks.
Similarly, subsidizing transgender surgery is much, much cheaper than paying for therapy sessions over a lifetime which they would need if they could not get said surgery, and we only offer it when it's clear to all concerned that it's the proper course of action anyway so it's not like we're offering it on the basis of individual whimsy.
PickeToes: To use your own example, we don't need teeth, so why should the government pay for dental care? And you can go get your teeth cleaned for next to free at a dental school, so dental treatment shouldn't really be necessary if you're taking proper care of your teeth—and if you aren't, why should I have to pay to fix your nasty mouth?
And why should I have to pay for health benefits for your ten kids because you wanted to have so many? Why do I have to pay for roads I don't use? Why do I have to pay for some frat boy's stupid forehead gash from some drunken prank when he doesn't need stitches—he could live, albeit unhappily, with a big ol' scar. So what if your kid is born with an enormous, disfiguring hemangioma on her face? Live with it or pay for it yerself, is what I say!
So, it's all relative. I have no problem with an insignificant amount of tax money going to a tiny handful of gender reassignments when so much of it is spent elsewhere on things that also have nothing to do with me, but also improve other people's lives.
Bird: Psychological counselling and a sex change operation can be distinguished by the fact that going to see a psychologist doesn't involve self-mutilation.
Marc: While its possible to survive without chewing anything, it would be difficult for people to survive on things they found to eat that didn't require it. Thus from a logistical perspective, they need teeth. I have no issue with your second paragraph, it sounds pretty reasonable to me.
http://www.corymorgan.com/?p=13 -- This website brings up some good points. I have a favourite: "Of course in trying to justify this utterly elective procedure, it has been pointed out that the de-bonings will only cost around $20,000 each. That must be comforting to people dying on waiting lists in Canada’s increasingly unsustainable socialized healthcare system. I would hate to be the nurse who has to explain to somebody; “I am sorry sir, we will have to delay your bypass surgery a little longer, the operating room is occupied by a man getting his weiner removed.”
Psychological counselling and a sex change operation can be distinguished by the fact that going to see a psychologist doesn't involve self-mutilation.
Medication altering - sometimes permanently - neurological activity is apparently not "self-mutilation," despite being for all practical intents and purposes the same thing: medical treatment designed to impair, alter, or remove bodily functions that are lowering the quality of life for the patient.
Your link, churlish as it is ignorant, reveals the heart of the reason people oppose this measure: it's because they think it's gross. They don't have any other good reason, and they're cloaking their bigotry in faux fiscal responsibility (yes, elective surgical procedures performed by specialists are certainly keeping all those cardiac surgeons busy!).
What's the difference between a sex change operation and slicing your wrists or amputation of an arm to satisfy a fetish?
It's the difference between sexual gratification and your mind and body being in active conflict. Gender identity disorder is a recognized mental health issue. There's no such thing as a half-measure (IE, jerking off to amputee porn) to satisfy it and unlike sexual interests it doesn't arise from child development but is innate in brain chemistry.
If it didn't concern sexual gratification then why would the sexual organs need to be altered?
It's about identity. My identity as a man is far more profound than "I have a dick."
Not all transsexuals require full sex change operations in order to feel as if they can operate as a person of the gender they believe they are; however, some undeniably do.
Transgenderism is something that usually starts as soon as a child is able to identify the social differences between genders and determine for themselves which they are. It's rare (and thankfully so - I can't imagine the level of confusion one would have trying to figure it out). But it is undeniably there.
But why is the problem with the body and not the mind that would desire such an abnormal thing?
Because we already tried dealing with it as a mental disorder - gender confusion used to be recognized as a mental illness in need of correction, rather than a health issue in need of assistance. Guess what - treating it as a health issue that can be resolved through surgery where necessary works better than treating it as a mental disorder.
You're asking all the same questions people asked twenty years ago and acting like they're novel. They aren't.
Actually my last two posts were out of genuine interest, not to outsmart you or whatnot. Anyway, thanks for answering.
PickleToes, I've noticed, is appearing in every gay-related thread recently to say vaguely homophobia and anti-gay things. Appearantly, transgendered people fall under the same banner.
I'm not anti-gay, I fully support the rights of homosexuals to enter into whatever relationships they desire to have. However sometimes I feel that in an effort to be tolerant, the powers that be grant the gay community privileges that go beyond sexual freedom to include things which would not be offered to other groups. Namely, costly operations to perfectly healthy body parts that I believe amounts to mutilation.
Be as homosexual as you want; you deserve nothing more, nothing less.
Am I still anti-gay? Am I still a "homophobe"? One who has been found to be scared of homosexuals by use of your powerful clairvoyance?
P.S.:
iantri - There have been many posts about homosexual movies lately; shown as part of a festival I gather. You'll find that I haven't posted in any of those. But then again nobody really has. I'm not here to attack homosexuality or even transexuality (both of which are fine with me). I will admit to being anti sex change.
Homosexuality has nothing to do with transgenderism. And gender reassignment surgeries—which aren't doled out like candy, by the way—aren't "special privileges for certain groups" any more than treatment for Tay-Sachs or sickle cell anemia or fallopian tumors are.
I can't think of any "privileges granted to the gay community that go beyond sexual freedom to include things which would not be offered to other groups." What are they?
PickleToes, I think that if you are fine with transsexuality but "anti-sex change," I think you don't really understand transgenderism (which I think goes for most people). As well, many (most?) transgendered people don't plan on reassignment surgery.
It's such a tiny, insignificant drop in the OHIP pond—I'm not sure why it's even an issue. I'm sure people would flip out if OHIP stopped covering surgery for kids born with cleft lips because that would be just mean-spirited, and I feel the same way with denying coverage for approved gender reassignment surgery.