Continuation Transwomen are not women - part 13

[Samson]

Originally Posted by TurkeysGhost

Nobody would lie on the internet, that's for sure.

Jeez, even for the standards of anti-trans people relying on anecdotes, "my reddit hate board is somewhat popular" is especially thin.

Two happy f to m transitioned discuss

https://youtu.be/jW5eJiMSPTE

Minute 44 specifies.
They are labelled transphobes because they understand most transitioners are bycatch. (My construct you are welcome).

[TurkeysGhost]

Originally Posted by Samson

(My construct you are welcome).

Don't pat yourself on the back, your post is unintelligible to me.

If you actually want a response from me, know that I'm not watching a youtube video, much less a 44 minute one. Feel free to summarize whatever points you think are relevant.

[Samson]

Originally Posted by TurkeysGhost

According to every plaintiff's lawsuit in history they have been done dirty and deserve compensation.

I can't find Kaiser's response anywhere, not sure if it's even been filed yet. Presumably they will claim that they followed every standard of care, thoroughly advised their patient, and only proceeded with informed consent. Far, far too soon to make any conclusions about the claims made.

If Chloe Cole, there is a thorough interview with Jordan Peterson, which should be a cue for a withering diatribe about him.

[TurkeysGhost]

Originally Posted by Samson

If Chloe Cole, there is a thorough interview with Jordan Peterson, which should be a cue for a withering diatribe about him.

Does he cry in it?

[Ziggurat]

Originally Posted by TurkeysGhost

According to every plaintiff's lawsuit in history they have been done dirty and deserve compensation.

Sometimes lawsuits fail as a matter of law, meaning that even if the facts are as alleged by the plaintiff, the defendant still isn't liable. You might think this would almost never happen but it does, and not that rarely. That's how you get dismissals before trial, since the trial is where facts are tested.

As a matter of law, I think Cole's suit will stand, that it will go to trial to be tested as a matter of facts.

Quote:

I can't find Kaiser's response anywhere, not sure if it's even been filed yet. Presumably they will claim that they followed every standard of care, thoroughly advised their patient, and only proceeded with informed consent. Far, far too soon to make any conclusions about the claims made.

"It's not a long shot" isn't really that much of a conclusion. I'm not suggesting it's a sure thing. But I find the alleged facts easily could be true. Not are true, but easily could be. Sometimes the facts alleged by plaintiffs seem extremely unlikely. This isn't one of those cases.

[Samson]

Originally Posted by TurkeysGhost

Don't pat yourself on the back, your post is unintelligible to me.

If you actually want a response from me, know that I'm not watching a youtube video, much less a 44 minute one. Feel free to summarize whatever points you think are relevant.

Just start at minute 44, forget the rest.
There are a few more or less valid transitioners, but the majority have just ruined their lives. Bycatch in trawling for legal fishes.
Follow the money.

[TurkeysGhost]

Originally Posted by Ziggurat

Sometimes lawsuits fail as a matter of law, meaning that even if the facts are as alleged by the plaintiff, the defendant still isn't liable. You might think this would almost never happen but it does, and not that rarely. That's how you get dismissals before trial, since the trial is where facts are tested.

As a matter of law, I think Cole's suit will stand, that it will go to trial to be tested as a matter of facts.



"It's not a long shot" isn't really that much of a conclusion. I'm not suggesting it's a sure thing. But I find the alleged facts easily could be true. Not are true, but easily could be. Sometimes the facts alleged by plaintiffs seem extremely unlikely. This isn't one of those cases.

Sure. Maybe they can prove their claims, maybe not. Not exactly a great example right now because at this early point of a lawsuit, no facts have been established.

Generally speaking filed lawsuits are worth basically nothing until they reach the adversarial phase of litigation. Not really much point in speculating at this point.

[Ziggurat]

Originally Posted by TurkeysGhost

Sure. Maybe they she can prove their her claims, maybe not.

FTFY.

[TurkeysGhost]

Originally Posted by Ziggurat

FTFY.

"They" was in reference to her legal team. She has lawyers, it's not a one-woman show. I'm not trying to prove any petty points by misgendering Cole.

[TomB]

Originally Posted by TurkeysGhost

Seems like a long shot unless she can demonstrate that the doctors engaged in medical malpractice, that is, that their care diverged from standards of care or other professional breach.



What is the regret rate for those that transition, and what rate do you think reaches an unacceptable level where individuals and their doctors should no longer be able to pursue this treatment?

You do understand that there is a rational position that lies somewhere between moving quickly towards medical transition and taking medical transition completely off the table, right? (Yes, I'm aware that this is a criticism that can be made of both sides of the debate.)

There have been quite a few anecdotal accounts of misapplied transition treatment. anecdotal evidence, though weak, is still evidence and should not be dismissed. Rather, it is an indication that something should be investigated on a more formal basis.

Specifically, the detransition cases should be examined (case study) to determine what went wrong in the diagnostic process so that misdiagnosis (and the resulting inappropriate treatments) can be prevented, or at least minimized.

Quote:

For reference, the regret rate for total knee replacement surgery is about 20%.

Comparisons with knee replacements are not an appropriate comparison, by the way. Regret of knee replacement comes from the perception that the treatment was worse than the condition it was treating or that the results were not worth the pain. Detransition "regret" comes from a different place: incorrect diagnosis.

There is a huge difference between the two.

[TurkeysGhost]

Originally Posted by TomB

You do understand that there is a rational position that lies somewhere between moving quickly towards medical transition and taking medical transition completely off the table, right? (Yes, I'm aware that this is a criticism that can be made of both sides of the debate.)

At least in the example of Chloe Cole, she is using her profile as an outspoken detransitioner to advocate for total bans on this kind of care. She is taking an extremist position and is being a useful tool for extremists. I'm guessing her right wing allies would be less interested in her perspective if this were not the case.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chloe_Cole

Originally Posted by TomB

There have been quite a few anecdotal accounts of misapplied transition treatment. anecdotal evidence, though weak, is still evidence and should not be dismissed. Rather, it is an indication that something should be investigated on a more formal basis.

Specifically, the detransition cases should be examined (case study) to determine what went wrong in the diagnostic process so that misdiagnosis (and the resulting inappropriate treatments) can be prevented, or at least minimized.

What makes you think this isn't being done? The bulk of evidence is that the regret rate is quite low and totally acceptable compared to the downsides of not allowing trans affirming care. Perhaps you're buying into the unsupported assumption by anti-trans activists that trans affirming care is being administered recklessly and without much safeguarding or care.

Take Chloe Cole's own example of taking years of slowly escalating trans affirming care, by no means rushed. Diagnosed with gender dysphoria at 9, socially transitions at 12, begins puberty blockers and hormone treatment at 13, and surgery at 15. hardly a gallop.

[Ziggurat]

Originally Posted by TurkeysGhost

The bulk of evidence is that the regret rate is quite low and totally acceptable compared to the downsides of not allowing trans affirming care.

The bulk of the evidence? We have no clue what the regret rate is for children who have medically transitioned. Results from studies of adult transition cannot be transferred to children. And short term studies don't tell us what long term results may be.

Quote:

Perhaps you're buying into the anti-trans unsupported assumption that trans affirming care is being administered recklessly and without much safeguarding or care.

Oh, there's lots of support for that. What's unsupported is the claim that medical transition for children actually improves outcomes more than alternative treatments.

[theprestige]

Originally Posted by d4m10n

It gets weirder when you consider that goth & emo boys were actively queering gender expression: eyeliner, lipstick, nail polish, skirts, etc.

Source: Firsthand experience from 90s goth clubs and basements and basement clubs.

I gothed up a bit in my youth. Lipstick, skirts, etc. Found out later my parents assumed I thought I might be gay, and was experimenting along those lines. Truth was, I was doing that too, but that's not what the goth presentation was about.

[theprestige]

Originally Posted by TomB

You do understand that there is a rational position that lies somewhere between moving quickly towards medical transition and taking medical transition completely off the table, right? (Yes, I'm aware that this is a criticism that can be made of both sides of the debate.)

Since it's been brought up, here's my position. I wonder how many here have a similar position:

This is all based on current information. If new information comes out, my position is subject to change.

I would take medical transition completely off the table for prepubescent children. No hormones, no surgery, full stop.

And I would take medical transition on the basis of fiat self-ID* off the table for everyone.

However, I would leave medical transition very much on the table for people who have been responsibly diagnosed with a condition, for which medical transition is the generally and ethically accepted best known treatment.

I might be willing to consider leaving medical transition on the table as a drastic elective procedure, as long as there's no talk of attaching transsexual rights or accommodations to the result.

---
*By "fiat self-ID I mean the entire gamut of "I said it, that settles it, you have to believe it" to "I formally file an affidavit with the state, which takes me at my word and updates my official documents to indicate my alleged sex".

[d4m10n]

Originally Posted by theprestige

I would take medical transition completely off the table for prepubescent children. No hormones, no surgery, full stop.

If we did this, then we'd never know whether the endocrine/surgery treatment pathway (GnRHa → CSH → SRS) actually outperforms any other treatment modality, such as watchful waiting with cognitive behavioral aversion therapy. Since I'm in favor of finding out the truth on this matter, I'm in favor of allowing patients and providers to opt in to treatment assuming they are part of a carefully controlled trial.

[theprestige]

Originally Posted by d4m10n

If we did this, then we'd never know whether the endocrine/surgery treatment pathway (GnRHa → CSH → SRS) actually outperforms any other treatment modality, such as watchful waiting with cognitive behavioral aversion therapy. Since I'm in favor of finding out the truth on this matter, I'm in favor of allowing patients and providers to opt in to treatment assuming they are part of a carefully controlled trial.

This begs the question that gender is sufficiently cognizeable in children for questions of dysphoria and medical treatment to even arise in the first place.

What, exactly are you proposing to trial? That a six year old boy who wants to wear a dress might be so profoundly distressed about his penis that he would in fact be happier if we cut it off before he hits puberty?

Show me the pathology, before you start talking about experimental treatments.

ETA: Like I said, my position is subject to change with new information. I would very much like to find out if there's actually a horse involved, before we start talking about the best kind of cart to hitch to it.

[TurkeysGhost]

Originally Posted by theprestige

Since it's been brought up, here's my position. I wonder how many here have a similar position:

This is all based on current information. If new information comes out, my position is subject to change.

I would take medical transition completely off the table for prepubescent children. No hormones, no surgery, full stop.

And I would take medical transition on the basis of fiat self-ID* off the table for everyone.

However, I would leave medical transition very much on the table for people who have been responsibly diagnosed with a condition, for which medical transition is the generally and ethically accepted best known treatment.

I might be willing to consider leaving medical transition on the table as a drastic elective procedure, as long as there's no talk of attaching transsexual rights or accommodations to the result.

This puts you to the left of Chloe Cole's position, where she is upset that she received post-pubescent transition care after receiving a diagnosis of dysphoria and supports policies totally banning anyone in a similar position from getting similar treatment.

[Emily's Cat]

Originally Posted by TurkeysGhost

Nobody would lie on the internet, that's for sure.

Jeez, even for the standards of anti-trans people relying on anecdotes, "my reddit hate board is somewhat popular" is especially thin.

What an incredibly cruel statement. Have you bothered to interact with and listen to what these detransitioners have to say?

[TurkeysGhost]

Originally Posted by Emily's Cat

What an incredibly cruel statement. Have you bothered to interact with and listen to what these detransitioners have to say?

So many anecdotes, so little time.

[Emily's Cat]

Originally Posted by TurkeysGhost

What makes you think this isn't being done? The bulk of evidence is that the regret rate is quite low and totally acceptable compared to the downsides of not allowing trans affirming care.

Evidence?

Originally Posted by TurkeysGhost

Perhaps you're buying into the unsupported assumption by anti-trans activists that trans affirming care is being administered recklessly and without much safeguarding or care.

And you're buying into the unsupported assumption by pro-trans activists that hormonal and medical intervention is the perfect solution to any and all mental health issues, and that questioning whether that makes sense is bigotry that shouldn't be allowed.

Seriously though. You seem to have swallowed two misrepresentations. First, the claim that "affirming care" is being administered in a reasonable, well considered, well informed, and thorough fashion.

That one is not true. It's not true by way of personal experience, and by way of the policies in place at Planned Parenthood in many locations - where they will provide a prescription for cross sex hormones on the first visit unless there's a medical condition that would prohibit it (eg, they won't prescribe estrogen to a male with epilepsy, it's counter indicated as it lowers seizure thresholds).

Secondly, you also seem to have swallowed the claim that "regret" is extremely low. Right now, regret is growing. One of the problems with many of the surveys cited that say regret is very low and that detransition is driven by social pressure is that they're only asking people who still identify as trans. By the very design of the surveys themselves, they exclude the very people who detranstion - those who were misdiagnosed as transgender, and who no longer see themselves as trans at all. It excludes exactly the group of people who are the biggest concern when it comes to the enthusiastic administration of "affirming" medical care.

Originally Posted by TurkeysGhost

Take Chloe Cole's own example of taking years of slowly escalating trans affirming care, by no means rushed. Diagnosed with gender dysphoria at 9, socially transitions at 12, begins puberty blockers and hormone treatment at 13, and surgery at 15. hardly a gallop.

Not a gallop, but also entirely irresponsible! Doctors shouldn't be taking the word of a 9 year old when it comes to this sort of thing. And they should NEVER be ******* up a developing person's body at the onset of puberty. They sure as hell shouldn't be performing surgeries that aren't medically necessary on bodies that aren't even fully grown!

[Emily's Cat]

Originally Posted by d4m10n

If we did this, then we'd never know whether the endocrine/surgery treatment pathway (GnRHa → CSH → SRS) actually outperforms any other treatment modality, such as watchful waiting with cognitive behavioral aversion therapy. Since I'm in favor of finding out the truth on this matter, I'm in favor of allowing patients and providers to opt in to treatment assuming they are part of a carefully controlled trial.

So... yeah, I'm going to push back on this.

First off, I'm not particularly crazy about the idea of using children in experiments that try to solve a psychological problem with physical interventions that cause bodily harm.

More than that, however, is that some of this we already know. We know from decades of practice that watchful waiting without affirmation has more than 80% success rate - most kids grow out of their dysphoria as they progress through puberty, and go on to live normal healthy lives. We've known this for a very long time.

Additionally, from more recent research by Sweden (I think? Maybe Finland) we also know that the affirmation path (GnRHa → CSH → SRS) does NOT provide long-term mental health benefits, it does NOT reduce suicidality and depression.

[Emily's Cat]

Originally Posted by TurkeysGhost

This puts you to the left of Chloe Cole's position, where she is upset that she received post-pubescent transition care after receiving a diagnosis of dysphoria and supports policies totally banning anyone in a similar position from getting similar treatment.

Originally Posted by TurkeysGhost

Diagnosed with gender dysphoria at 9, socially transitions at 12, begins puberty blockers and hormone treatment at 13, and surgery at 15.

None of that is post-pubescent. Affirmation of belief began before the onset of puberty. Puberty was BLOCKED at onset, and the rest of the permanent medical interventions occurred within the first half of the pubertal window.

[theprestige]

Originally Posted by TurkeysGhost

This puts you to the left of Chloe Cole's position, where she is upset that she received post-pubescent transition care after receiving a diagnosis of dysphoria and supports policies totally banning anyone in a similar position from getting similar treatment.

Is that really the best you have? Just crossing your fingers and hoping I'll fall for the positional gimmick? That I'll say, "****, I'm to the left of someone, I better revise my worldview!"

Is that how you arrive at your conclusions, and you just desperately assume it must be the same for everyone else?

Incidentally, I'm curious which logical fallacy this is. Appeal to authority, probably. Like Chloe Cole is supposed to be some sort of revered oracle in my pantheon, and if I'm on her wrong side I'd best get right right quick? Pull the other one, it's got bells on.*

[TurkeysGhost]

Originally Posted by theprestige

Is that really the best you have? Just crossing your fingers and hoping I'll fall for the positional gimmick? That I'll say, "****, I'm to the left of someone, I better revise my worldview!"

Is that how you arrive at your conclusions, and you just desperately assume it must be the same for everyone else?

Incidentally, I'm curious which logical fallacy this is. Appeal to authority, probably. Like Chloe Cole is supposed to be some sort of revered oracle in my pantheon, and if I'm on her wrong side I'd best get right right quick? Pull the other one, it's got bells on.*

That wasn't my intention at all. I am not trying to convince you of anything, I am just pointing out relevant benchmarks. The position taken by Cole and advocated by American right wingers is significantly more restrictive than what you have offered. Do you disagree with that assessment?

The American right has staked out such an extremely restrictive view of the issue that anyone who isn't advocating for a total prohibition for trans affirming care for minors (and often adults) is to their left. Seems worth noting.

[d4m10n]

Originally Posted by Emily's Cat

We know from decades of practice that watchful waiting without affirmation has more than 80% success rate - most kids grow out of their dysphoria as they progress through puberty, and go on to live normal healthy lives.

Where are you getting this figure and how does it compare to similarly situated patients who were put on the endocrine pathway?



Sent from my SM-G996U using Tapatalk

[Trausti]

Originally Posted by d4m10n

Where are you getting this figure and how does it compare to similarly situated patients who were put on the endocrine pathway?



Sent from my SM-G996U using Tapatalk

Here's one source:

https://www.aerzteblatt.de/int/archive/article/62554

Gender Identity Disorders in Childhood and Adolescence

Quote:

Only 2.5% to 20% of all cases of GID in childhood and adolescence are the initial manifestation of irreversible transsexualism. The current state of research on this subject does not allow any valid diagnostic parameters to be identified with which one could reliably predict whether the manifestations of GID will persist, i.e., whether transsexualism will develop with certainty or, at least, a high degree of probability.

[Trausti]

It's apparent that the gender cult wants to get kids locked in early lest they forget they're trans.

https://www.frontiersin.org/articles...21.632784/full

A Follow-Up Study of Boys With Gender Identity Disorder

Quote:

Of the 139 participants, 17 (12.2%) were classified as persisters and the remaining 122 (87.8%) were classified as desisters. Data on sexual orientation in fantasy were available for 129 participants: 82 (63.6%) were classified as biphilic/androphilic, 43 (33.3%) were classified as gynephilic, and 4 (3.1%) reported no sexual fantasies. For sexual orientation in behavior, data were available for 108 participants: 51 (47.2%) were classified as biphilic/androphilic, 29 (26.9%) were classified as gynephilic, and 28 (25.9%) reported no sexual behaviors.

You gotta trans the gay away.

[smartcooky]

Originally Posted by Emily's Cat

What an incredibly cruel statement. Have you bothered to interact with and listen to what these detransitioners have to say?[

Hell no!!!

Doing that would mean having to hear alternate viewpoints. How is someone supposed to stick to their rigid, dogmatic, ******-up worldview if they have to hear stuff they don't agree with!?

[LondonJohn]

Originally Posted by Trausti

It's apparent that the gender cult wants to get kids locked in early lest they forget they're trans.

https://www.frontiersin.org/articles...21.632784/full

A Follow-Up Study of Boys With Gender Identity Disorder



You gotta trans the gay away.

You do realise that this (imaginary) "gender cult" actually consists of the entirety of mainstream medical science, and every single significant medical organisation/body (including all the important paediatric ones)? To read what you're writing, one might be forgiven for thinking that this "gender cult" was a maverick, out-of-control cabal that's neither recognised nor condoned/sanctioned by mainstream medicine. Weird, huh?

[Wolrab]

Originally Posted by LondonJohn

You do realise that this (imaginary) "gender cult" actually consists of the entirety of mainstream medical science, and every single significant medical organisation/body (including all the important paediatric ones)? To read what you're writing, one might be forgiven for thinking that this "gender cult" was a maverick, out-of-control cabal that's neither recognised nor condoned/sanctioned by mainstream medicine. Weird, huh?

You have been called out for BS posting those claims so many times. As usual, you will ignore anything contradicting your beliefs. Why?

[Matthew Best]

Crown Prosecution Service’s hate crime lead wants to listen, learn and regain trust of LGBTQ+ victims

Lionel Idan’s journey of understanding the complexities of hate crime and the lived experiences of marginalised groups, especially LGBTQ+ folk, can be traced back to his early career with the CPS, when he started to take part in more community engagement.

“All it takes is for you to meet one or two hate victims to really feel that pain,” he said.

“I remember one of my early experiences, it must have been 2006, I met with the chair of my local transgender advocacy group,” Idan continued.

“She told me a story which maybe was the turning point, which really made me think about the way we do things in a different light.

“She was about 60 or 70 years old at the time, and she said, ‘Lionel, back when I was younger, I couldn’t walk into a shop and buy women’s lingerie. And so I used to have to steal items off of clotheslines. Now, what would you have done? If a case involving me had come onto your desk?’

“I said, ‘Of course, I’d have prosecuted you.’ And she said, ‘There you go. Now, you know the context. I had to steal, not because I’m a thief, but because I couldn’t buy what I needed for my identity.’

“That was one of the moments where I realised, in the job I do, that to better understand lived experience is absolutely crucial.”

YouTube Video This video is not hosted by the ISF. The ISF can not be held responsible for the suitability or legality of this material. By clicking the link below you agree to view content from an external website.

I AGREE

[lionking]

Originally Posted by LondonJohn

You do realise that this (imaginary) "gender cult" actually consists of the entirety of mainstream medical science, and every single significant medical organisation/body (including all the important paediatric ones)? To read what you're writing, one might be forgiven for thinking that this "gender cult" was a maverick, out-of-control cabal that's neither recognised nor condoned/sanctioned by mainstream medicine. Weird, huh?

Sounds like a very good description of Tavistock. You know that once revered body well accepted by mainstream medicine…..

[theprestige]

Originally Posted by Matthew Best

Crown Prosecution Service’s hate crime lead wants to listen, learn and regain trust of LGBTQ+ victims

Lionel Idan’s journey of understanding the complexities of hate crime and the lived experiences of marginalised groups, especially LGBTQ+ folk, can be traced back to his early career with the CPS, when he started to take part in more community engagement.

“All it takes is for you to meet one or two hate victims to really feel that pain,” he said.

“I remember one of my early experiences, it must have been 2006, I met with the chair of my local transgender advocacy group,” Idan continued.

“She told me a story which maybe was the turning point, which really made me think about the way we do things in a different light.

“She was about 60 or 70 years old at the time, and she said, ‘Lionel, back when I was younger, I couldn’t walk into a shop and buy women’s lingerie. And so I used to have to steal items off of clotheslines. Now, what would you have done? If a case involving me had come onto your desk?’

“I said, ‘Of course, I’d have prosecuted you.’ And she said, ‘There you go. Now, you know the context. I had to steal, not because I’m a thief, but because I couldn’t buy what I needed for my identity.’

“That was one of the moments where I realised, in the job I do, that to better understand lived experience is absolutely crucial.”

YouTube Video This video is not hosted by the ISF. The ISF can not be held responsible for the suitability or legality of this material. By clicking the link below you agree to view content from an external website.

I AGREE

This discussion would be a lot different if it were actually about letting men buy ladies' underwear if they're so inclined.

[Emily's Cat]

Originally Posted by theprestige

Is that really the best you have? Just crossing your fingers and hoping I'll fall for the positional gimmick? That I'll say, "****, I'm to the left of someone, I better revise my worldview!"

Is that how you arrive at your conclusions, and you just desperately assume it must be the same for everyone else?

Incidentally, I'm curious which logical fallacy this is. Appeal to authority, probably. Like Chloe Cole is supposed to be some sort of revered oracle in my pantheon, and if I'm on her wrong side I'd best get right right quick? Pull the other one, it's got bells on.*

I have to admit that I giggled a bit at the insinuation that you were "to the left" of someone being somehow a cause for concern. I think nearly all of us on this site, as well as in this thread, are generally on the left. Some might be closer to the middle, but there are incredibly few people on this site that are actually on the right. The idea that you'd be abashed by being called "left" is a bit laughable.

[d4m10n]

Originally Posted by Trausti

Here's one source:

https://www.aerzteblatt.de/int/archive/article/62554

Respectfully, I don't think "all cases of GID in childhood and adolescence" is the reference population here, when we're trying to compare to those patients who were eventually referred to the endocrinologists from centres of excellence in paediatric gender medicine such as GIDS Tavistock. While some practitioners played it a bit fast and loose in terms of screening, the endocrine net wasn't cast over anything close to 100% of children presenting with at least some symptoms of GID.

[Samson]

Originally Posted by LondonJohn

You do realise that this (imaginary) "gender cult" actually consists of the entirety of mainstream medical science, and every single significant medical organisation/body (including all the important paediatric ones)? To read what you're writing, one might be forgiven for thinking that this "gender cult" was a maverick, out-of-control cabal that's neither recognised nor condoned/sanctioned by mainstream medicine. Weird, huh?

Is R18 in the UK a good move or pandering to the ant trans extremists?

[Emily's Cat]

Originally Posted by d4m10n

Where are you getting this figure and how does it compare to similarly situated patients who were put on the endocrine pathway?

Originally Posted by Trausti

Here's one source:

https://www.aerzteblatt.de/int/archive/article/62554

Gender Identity Disorders in Childhood and Adolescence

Yup, that's one of them. There are numerous sources that have noted that gender dysphoria that presents in childhood or at the onset of puberty, if left untreated, will resolve in at least 80% of cases as puberty progresses, with no long term negative affects.

[Emily's Cat]

Originally Posted by LondonJohn

You do realise that this (imaginary) "gender cult" actually consists of the entirety of mainstream medical science, and every single significant medical organisation/body (including all the important paediatric ones)? To read what you're writing, one might be forgiven for thinking that this "gender cult" was a maverick, out-of-control cabal that's neither recognised nor condoned/sanctioned by mainstream medicine. Weird, huh?

Well, you know, except for NHS, the Karolinska Institute, and a few others in European countries that you seem to have decided aren't part of the advanced world for some reason or other.

[TurkeysGhost]

Originally Posted by Emily's Cat

Well, you know, except for NHS, the Karolinska Institute, and a few others in European countries that you seem to have decided aren't part of the advanced world for some reason or other.

To be fair, TERF island is rapidly descending into "developing world" status. If I were you, I'd lean heavier on the other European powers that aren't collapsing inward on themselves as better examples of responsible, sober governance.

[Emily's Cat]

Originally Posted by Matthew Best

Crown Prosecution Service’s hate crime lead wants to listen, learn and regain trust of LGBTQ+ victims

Lionel Idan’s journey of understanding the complexities of hate crime and the lived experiences of marginalised groups, especially LGBTQ+ folk, can be traced back to his early career with the CPS, when he started to take part in more community engagement.

“All it takes is for you to meet one or two hate victims to really feel that pain,” he said.

“I remember one of my early experiences, it must have been 2006, I met with the chair of my local transgender advocacy group,” Idan continued.

“She told me a story which maybe was the turning point, which really made me think about the way we do things in a different light.

“She was about 60 or 70 years old at the time, and she said, ‘Lionel, back when I was younger, I couldn’t walk into a shop and buy women’s lingerie. And so I used to have to steal items off of clotheslines. Now, what would you have done? If a case involving me had come onto your desk?’

“I said, ‘Of course, I’d have prosecuted you.’ And she said, ‘There you go. Now, you know the context. I had to steal, not because I’m a thief, but because I couldn’t buy what I needed for my identity.’

“That was one of the moments where I realised, in the job I do, that to better understand lived experience is absolutely crucial.”

YouTube Video This video is not hosted by the ISF. The ISF can not be held responsible for the suitability or legality of this material. By clicking the link below you agree to view content from an external website.

I AGREE

I have opinions and speculations.

First off, I doubt it was illegal for this pensioner to purchase lingerie when they were younger. They might have gotten some weird looks... but seriously? Was it actually completely unheard of for a male to purchase undergarments for their spouse? I think there are probably lots of ways that this male could have legally purchased female undergarments, and the claim that they were "forced" to steal them seems like some post-hoc rationalization to me.

Secondly... apparently Idan's "journey" of understanding the experiences of the people they are supposed to protect doesn't extend to females. Somehow, the lived experiences of females seems to have not made it onto their radar.