First you say, go learn about psychology before I can make any claims; an argument for authority.
Then you claim parents will blindly follow the research of "experts"; an argument against authority.
And that they should be figuring it out for themselves; an argument against authority.
Then you say the solution comes from long-standing psychological principals; an argument for authority.
Now you say your research supports you and you want me to find opposing research and claim that it's hard to come by; an argument for and against authority.

So which is it, do you want me to come up with the answer myself or from the experts, or only the one's you say are experts?

There is no research that says that you can program a trans child to not be trans. What you may be positively reinforcing is hiding themselves and their gender identity which could lead to more gender dysphoria and hardship down the line. That, to me, is bad parenting.

I didn't really want to go here but if you really need research there's probably relevant studies produced from conversion therapy where electroshock treatment was administered as negative punishment, a form of operant conditioning, which caused them to feel shamed, conflicted and fearful about their homosexual feelings.

Do you really think positive/negative reinforcement will stop them from feeling something? Seems like it will just stop a child from showing that behavior to their parent and depending on how the child is treated, actually prove detrimental to their mental and physical health. Not sure if you'll allow me to form my own opinion on this one or if I have to look to the experts.

Not that there's anything wrong with being a psychologist, but I'm actually a psychiatrist (a child and adolescent psychiatrist more specifically). An actual medical doctor. Do you think I'm actually less likely to know more about the topic than people without a formal education in it?

Hahahahahhahah wow. You just get to declare that it's the mom who is manipulative, while the dad who does a bunch of inexpert, unguided research and who has a long legacy of deceit and fraud in his life is the real authority?

I had a response to everything, till I got here. This shows you have no comprehension of what I'm writing.

This is the last time.

Kids will wrap themselves into pretzels for their parents, they will conform or contort their own sense of identity for their parents, irrespective of how they feel. They will do this according to how a parent responds to a particular behavior. They do not have the capacity to be critical, other than in very basic ways, until at least adolescents. Most of the push back a kid gives is related to pushing boundaries, rather than any critical ideas they may have related to their identity. Kids, especially when at the age we are talking about, are influenced by what they see. If a kid mimics something, and gets positive reinforcement, they will likely do it again. So, what's starts as a mimic, turns into the kid trying to get the satisfactory response from the parent.

I want to ask you something, is the brain on fire hypothesis talked about a lot in your field? Specifically, it's correlation with depression? I am just genuinely curious. Also, what I said was rude and I am sorry for that. I just personally have seen a ton of people mistreated, I don't doubt there are plenty of great psychologist/psychiatrist.

yea, as a kid i snuck out at night to go drink with my friends because "positive reinforcement".

....

Your response to if a drug was safe, was entirely based on what another doctor said. No research, no education, no nothing other than what fellow doctors said. What if a doctor told them they were safe. Go ahead, show me the research that says there is "little down side risk, long term". You only think that becasue that's what you were told. I have not seen any research that indicates the risk was known. It's off label use, and it's not approved by the FDA, and it's experimental. You made a point to say "little down side risk". What did medical school say about this?

Why did you sneak?

How many kids did you say you have?

I want to hear more about you disputing what they are teaching in modern psychology, that has not been embraced for, what did you say, 50 years? But it's in a text book first published in 2014 (with zero criticisms of it), and has a key take away concerning psychology and reinforcement. I think you continue to find a way to invalidate some really important psychological principals, using irrelevant stuff.

It is not used as a tenant of psychology today and your book doesnt refute that. It simply explains what behaviorism is and how it works. It does not in any way indicate it is still being used in psychological treatment today.

Your turn.

How many kids?

What scientific degree do you hold?

Lots of "**** you"s to hand out to some of the bullshit sexist responses to my last post

Instead of doing that I'll just say "you know who you are", and "**** you"

**** it, do your homework.

https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q...=1&oi=scholart

Also, the performance is during my third trimester, so **** you too

Is it possible the individual/individuals were not intentionally being sexist? Maybe there questions just came off sexist?

ITT dressing like a girl makes one look "foolish"

How about.... **** you

Oh don't worry, I don't mean "**** you" in an aggressive way. I mean "**** you" in its most flippant and dismissive interpretation.

Like I give a **** if they mean it or not. I know what it means *to me*.

Also, **** you

The things that have been said in this thread, just BIG WOW. Congrats, idiots.

Good day to you too.

You people are all ****ed up for life but Crossnerd does win with the correct derogatory usage.

Idiots.—Those so defective that the mental development never exceeds that or a normal child of about two years.
Imbeciles.—Those whose development is higher than that of an idiot, but whose intelligence does not exceed that of a normal child of about seven years.
Morons.—Those whose mental development is above that of an imbecile, but does not exceed that of a normal child of about twelve years.

It's mind boggling to me, the APA's position is entirely built on reinforcement, with positive reinforcement, and we have the activist denying reinforcement is a thing.

For someone so convinced he’s biologically superior, you sure do have a massive amount of fragile ego and masculinity. Seems to be some type of dysphoria. A psychologist might be able to help you with this fwiw.

Never have promoted genetic superiority, but thanks.