Article on Trans Surgery

[The Nehor]

4 hours ago, bsjkki said:

Another whistleblower account.  https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/e04f4958-aa26-11ed-8a03-b2faadede0c5?shareToken=c9f39b2372fb8a63e6589e4a02f71a6c

The British knock-off version of the original? If past experience is anything to go by this one is probably not as good.

I am completely unsurprised that autism is more prevalent in that practice. The two conditions often occur together.

The “induced illness” bit is bad reporting. Who is saying this? Spoilers: It is social media and gender transition is not likely to gratify that syndrome. The goal with that syndrome is to be seen as heroically dedicated to an ill child. Your child being transgender is unlikely to gratify that. You might get some initial support in pro-transgender spaces but you can’t ride that for long as you being heroic while your child suffers compared to the child being bedridden or dealing with ubiquitous allergies or the child having a mental or emotional condition that makes child rearing very difficult. If the child already has autism all you have to do is exaggerate the severity and maybe poison the kid a little to have even more health problems and you can live off that for years.

If it is verified that it is 100% of kids who show up get referred for puberty blockers that is a problem but this complaint seems suspiciously similar to the one in the US.

[SeekingUnderstanding]

1 hour ago, Calm said:

Giving medications to youth really concerns me because I have seen, including up close what a bad job pediatric psychiatrists too often do by not looking holistically at a kid’s needs, but just focusing on the main complaint they are there for.

This sooooo much. It’s my main issue with posts like the OP, and recent legislation. We are failing kids all around, so the outsized focus on trans kids comes across as nothing more than thinly veiled transphobia. 

[BlueDreams]

18 hours ago, SeekingUnderstanding said:

This sooooo much. It’s my main issue with posts like the OP, and recent legislation. We are failing kids all around, so the outsized focus on trans kids comes across as nothing more than thinly veiled transphobia. 

I wish there was more space for it not to though. I also find many (not all) whistleblower accounts compelling. They tend to have major themes and several of those are concerning. As well as certain calls for better screen and therapy based care before jumping right into medical solutions. They hold similar themes and there's still serious holes in both treatment and the current modality that makes me worry that we're likely missing some things that will likely shoot some in the butt in a few years. I think there's reason for added concern of the treatment modality around this even though we have plenty of medical holes we already have around mental health for you for two reasons. For one, The potential effects of misdiagnosing may include serious physical harm if wrong and some of the comorbidities I've seen mentioned are real serious ones in terms of mental health that may be going under or mistreated. For another, The number of both treatment centers and youth claiming some degree of gender dysphoria or trans identity are exponentially growing and drastically changing in demographics. Again, part of this may be completely normal...an indication of greater social acceptability. But part of this may not be and may include aspects of social contagion, misdiagnosing, and overfocus on one form of pathology that is more symptom to more global and severe pathologies that may not be getting the treatment they need.

I hold a mild unease particularly since the amount of body issues and experiencs that can cause gender dissonance in girls is generally higher for young teen girls than boys anyways...and most of these concerns could be treated without the need of lifelong medical intervention and/or hormones that can have serious side efffects. And that's the population now most likely to come out as trans or non-binary in the younger cohorts. 

I'm also concerned that the model is based on beliefs and practices that are in part based on previous demographics. Kinda similar to how when gay and lesbian folk started to gain more public presence the idea of "born that way" and those most likely to have the least flexible sexualities were the ones leading the movement...because they were the least able to conform to social attitudes and thus major formers of community space for people like them. As sexual diversity gained more space and social acceptance has shifted, the demos on who ID's under the queer umbrella has expanded and this has also shifted research/general understandinging of a wider array of same-sex attraction in lifetimes of expression. And it can still be a little uncomfortable of an ideological shift because the two narratives prior that still hold social weight were oversimplified and poorly held nuance. 

Likewise the people first working with gender divergent experiences are using old expectations. Largely based on the people whose trans ID were less malleable, more straightforward/root causes to other pathologies (usually depressive/anxiety symptoms), and seriously harmed by an extremely rigid and binary system. In a society where those seeking treatment were a miniscule segment of the population and great treatment centers specializing in this in small specialized clinics that were cautious in their approach..most had less solid sources with heavy biases. For them, earlier affirmation or space to healthily experiment with social transitioning would have likely saved them a world of pain. But to assume this is the exact same story for any one who's struggled with their gender is again an oversimplified narrative one that was in reaction to another oversimplified larger narrative around gender and gender roles  I've seen some legitimate summaries and concerns and they quickly get shuffled into the questionable/transphobic category....even if they show nuance or are very carefully defined concerns. There's a few others that I don't agree with some of the language used but still can see several valid concerns in the general argument. (Later today if I'm lucky I can give an article that does a great job summarizing things I've had the most concern with)...but right now I'm on my phone and it's not the easiest to do). Our toxic polarization keeps legitimate concerns strapped with more transphobic ones and that's a problem if what we're aiming for is healthy care for kids/teens. 

 

with luv, 

BD 

 

 

[SeekingUnderstanding]

51 minutes ago, BlueDreams said:

 

20 hours ago, SeekingUnderstanding said:

This sooooo much. It’s my main issue with posts like the OP, and recent legislation. We are failing kids all around, so the outsized focus on trans kids comes across as nothing more than thinly veiled transphobia. 

I wish there was more space for it not to though.

 

Maybe there should be a greater effort by those pushing blanket legislative bans on medical decisions (instead of say, more caution study etc) to condemn the blatant anti trans groups that are supporting them. Maybe broaden the focus to include the over medication of all children (and many adults) that’s going on. Maybe find funds for more and better wholistic treatment. There are lots of options available. The option chosen though reveals the thinly veiled transphobia. 

[BlueDreams]

3 hours ago, SeekingUnderstanding said:

Maybe there should be a greater effort by those pushing blanket legislative bans on medical decisions (instead of say, more caution study etc) to condemn the blatant anti trans groups that are supporting them. Maybe broaden the focus to include the over medication of all children (and many adults) that’s going on. Maybe find funds for more and better wholistic treatment. There are lots of options available. The option chosen though reveals the thinly veiled transphobia. 

Again, that is an unfortunate product of our toxic polarized system, where instead of nuanced dialogue with more complex responses to a problem/concern, we get these very over simplified and overreactive policies that don't actually help. I by no means agree with the most extreme voices. And to be clear I put voices/policies that want to completely remove medical treatment and refer to people as "Groomers" for viewing and responding to concerns differently in that category. I think that's villainizing people trying to do their best with the information and sources of care that we do have. And I do think, as mentioned, there are likely people with strong consistent primary diagnosis of gender dyphoria with moderate/high degrees of distress that at least some medical/hormonal transition should be available before adulthood. 

That said, I don't know if it's  good to treat these policy wise as exactly the same. Both the forms of available treatment and the intensity of care are very different than most mental health related concerns. Thus there should be aspects that are differentiated and specifically addressed. Kinda like how our medical system generally could use restructuring, but specific areas of care may need more specific solutions. There's parts that are universal (availability of general care services, affordability and coverage by insurance for even basic mental health care) that desperately need to be better addressed. Some of these are on smaller scales...they get little coverage because they're not news sexy. As in they're technical, incremental, and not immediately connected to national issues. For example my state recently reduced some standards for licensure/graduation to help increase therapist availabilty. The discourse usually entailed discussions with the legislative body (which was usually overly enthusiastic to cut standards) and practicing therapists in the community (who were more conservative as to what was reduced). None of this that I was aware of hit news sources much. None of this magically solves all of our problems within the mental health field or pretends to do so. Some of our problems would be better met if there was national dialogue, but though I hear plenty of lip service to it on both sides of our political divide, there's very little concrete initiatives given national attention/push. 

On there being a lot of options, I see options as still pretty limited in this field. Though I may be misunderstanding what you mean by that. I'll try to illustrate what I mean. You have gender affirming centers, that usually have very long wait lists (though that's a problem for just about every established therapist I know of period...my personal wait list is for over a year). You have therapists who usually have limited training tied more to their CEU's than formal education....which ceu's also skews strongly to the gender affirming model since it's the most current research-based model. (This is still a "newer" concern in terms of it being more of larger demographic and being less in the hands of a very small group of care providers). And you have forgoing therapy all together beyond maybe rudimentary diagnosis and leaning heavily to medical solutions or just socially transitioning on one's own terms. Compare this to, say, treating depression. You have multiple disciplinary models for managing it, several having research backing. There are several forms of medical therapies to either use alone or augment with therapy. And just about every therapist has both training and experience in treating it.

 

With luv,

BD

 

  

Edited February 13, 2023 by BlueDreams

[bsjkki]

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11754435/Emails-doctors-St-Louis-transgender-clinic-telling-teachers-affirm-fifth-graders.html

[bsjkki]

2 minutes ago, bsjkki said:

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11754435/Emails-doctors-St-Louis-transgender-clinic-telling-teachers-affirm-fifth-graders.html

 

[bsjkki]

2 minutes ago, bsjkki said:

 

 

 

Personally, I don’t think a fifth grade teacher in these circumstances is qualified to lead discussions about gender exploration in the classroom.
 

Edited February 16, 2023 by bsjkki

[smac97]

Just saw this item about World Athletics ("the international governing body for the sport of athletics, covering track and field, cross country running, road running, race walking, mountain running, and ultra running") : Trans-Women Banned from Woman's Division in Olympics (YouTube video).  More here:

Quote

World Athletics (WA), the governing body for track and field and other running competitions, announced last month that transgender women who went through male puberty can no longer compete in women’s events at international competitions. The policy took effect on 31 March.

WA also ruled that to compete as a woman, athletes with differences of sexual development (DSD), who have congenital conditions that cause atypical sex development, must have a testosterone level below 2.5 nanomoles per liter (nmol/L) for at least 24 months before an international competition.

WA said its rules prioritized fairness and “integrity of female competition.” The organization’s president, Sebastian Coe, said, “We will be guided in this by the science around physical performance and male advantage which will inevitably develop over the coming years.”

This development follows last year's announcement by World Aquatics / FINA, the international governing body for aquatic sports, to effectively restrict women's sports to biological women.  From June 2022:

Quote

The Swimming’s world governing body FINA meeting in the Hungarian capital city voted to restrict transgender athletes from elite women’s competitions. The final vote tally of the representatives was 71.5% approval for the new policy which requires transgender athletes show that “they have not experienced any part of male puberty beyond Tanner Stage 2 or before age 12, whichever is later.”

Enactment of that requirement effectively eliminates trans women’s eligibility to compete in the women’s category.

Tanner Stages describe the physical changes people undergo during puberty.

“We have to protect the rights of our athletes to compete, but we also have to protect competitive fairness at our events, especially the women’s category at FINA competitions,” FINA’s president, Husain Al-Musallam, said in a statement.

The organisation is maintaining that it was necessary to use sex and sex-linked traits to determine eligibility criteria because of the “performance gap” that appears between males and females during puberty.

“Without eligibility standards based on biological sex or sex-linked traits, we are very unlikely to see biological females in finals, on podiums, or in championship positions; and in sports and events involving collisions and projectiles, biological female athletes would be at greater risk of injury,” the statement from FINA’s new policy read.

The announcement by World Athletics was also followed by this announcement by Swim England, the national governing body for swimming, diving, water polo, open water swimming, and synchronised swimming in England:

Quote

Swim England Transgender and Non-binary Competition policy

Swim England’s updated transgender and non-binary competition policy has inclusion and fairness at its very heart.

In order for all aquatic disciplines to be enjoyed as sport, there must be inclusive opportunities for transgender participants to compete.

However, it is widely recognised that fairness of competition must be protected and Swim England believes the creation of open and female categories is the best way to achieve this.

These categories are designated as:

• Female – athletes with a birth sex of female
• Open – athletes with a birth sex of male, trans or non-binary competitors and any competitor not eligible for the female category

The updated policy ensures there are entry-level competitive opportunities for transgender people to participate in the majority of our disciplines within their gender identity.

In order to progress further, however, the Female/Open categories are utilised as a means to protect fair competition within the sporting pathway.

Peer-reviewed examples confirm the general consensus that post-puberty transgender females retain a biological level of performance advantage post-transition.

Whilst Swim England’s existing policy regarding the use of hormonal therapy was found to be effective at reducing performance advantage, it was insufficient to negate it completely and trans females therefore likely retain an advantage over their cisgender peers.

As a result, Swim England believes that the restriction of certain competition to birth sex females to be justified and proportionate in the pursuit of fair competition.

Similarly, UK Athletics, the governing body for the sport of athletics in the United Kingdom, has also recently "announced a ban on transgender athletes competing in the female category."

Reactions to these developments have been, unsurprisingly, mixed.

See, e.g., here: "World is finally waking up" - Martina Navratilova endorses World Athletics' decision to bar transgender women from female competitions

Quote

Martina Navratilova has expressed her support to a new rule excluding transgender women from female events. With the rule having recently been introduced by World Athletics, Navratilova called for wider action across all sports regarding this issue.
...

In a piece for The Sunday Times, Navratilova expressed her delight at the decision made by World Athletics and stated her desire to see other sporting bodies making similar moves.

"It seems the world is finally waking up and using common sense. I just hope other sports can quickly follow suit," she wrote.

Martina Navratilova has always been vocal about her stance on this issue. She believes allowing transgender women to compete in the female category would give them an unfair advantage over biological female athletes.

The 18-time Slam champion reiterated that very point in her column and argued that champions are respected because they excel beyond their peers when all aspects of the competition are equal. According to Navratilova, while some athletes may have inherent advantages, efforts should be made to level the playing field, and allowing transgender women in female categories would do the opposite.

"Athletes who are champions are revered for a reason. They rise above the rest when everything else is equal. Some may say that nothing is ever completely equal. Yes, somebody may be taller or naturally stronger, or have more coaching opportunities, but you try to make as level a playing field as you possibly can. Then, in that field, somebody is going to be the best," she stated.

"But when you change that starting position and do not begin from a level playing field, then it is obviously unfair," she added.

Here (by "International Family News") : World Athletics heads back to normalcy: No males in female sport

Quote

World Athletics announced on March 24 that as of the end of this month no transgender athletes will be allowed to participate alongside members of the opposite sex. This will replace the rule that allowed male athletes to compete alongside women if they artificially reduced their testosterone levels below a certain threshold for 12 months. President Lord Sebastian Coe said the decision was “guided by the overall principle, which is to protect the women’s category,” but said the athletics governing body will continue to work on transgender eligibility guidelines.

Here (by "VCY America," apparently a Christian group) : World Athletics Council Bans Transgender Athletes

Quote

Finally, an athletic organization showing courage, common sense, and fairness. The council’s press release also points out that research shows what common sense tells us: males have physical advantages over women in these competitions. We need more athletic organizations at every level of competition to follow the example of this Athletic Council.       

Here (by "PopSugar.com") : Transgender Women Are Women — So Why Has World Athletics Banned Them From Competing?

Quote

In a perfect world, all people could participate in the sport of their choice — regardless of skill set, physical abilities, skin color, gender, age, or background. And although there's a growing desire to increase inclusion in the sports world (think: facilities determined to be a safe space for LGBTQ+ athletes and advocates for diverse representation), a recent announcement by World Athletics, the international organization for track and field, seeks to set the transgender community back.
...

Liz Ward, director of programs at Stonewall, a UK-based LGBTQ+ group, shared her disapproval on the matter. "It is so disappointing to see World Athletics announce a unilateral ban on trans women in track and field events. Their own statement recognizes that there are no trans women competing at an international level and that they have no specific evidence to justify the ban," she tells POPSUGAR. "It is vital that decisions about trans participation are based on robust evidence, specific to the sport played, and the athletes competing at that level of the sport. We stand with trans people who now have the door closed on their chance to compete in athletic sports at an international level."

Joanna Hoffman, director of communications for Athlete Ally, urges supporters and sports advocates all over to "join in fighting against threats and to stop targeting transgender athletes. Every person deserves to be exactly who they are, and to be safe, welcome, and included in all parts of their life, including sports."

Here (by "TransgenderFeed.com") : World Athletics Council bans trans women athletes competing in female events

Quote

On Thursday, World Athletics (WA) unveiled new guidelines affecting transgender female athletes that will bar some from taking part in female track and field competitions. These regulations, effective as of March 31, forbid athletes who have undergone what WA terms “male puberty” from joining female world rankings contests.
...
The move was heavily criticized by pro-LGBTQ rights groups saying the decision was discriminatory.

“We are beyond devastated to see World Athletics succumbing to political pressure instead of core principles of inclusion, fairness and non-discrimination for transgender athletes and athletes with intersex variations,” said Hudson Taylor, founder and executive director of advocacy group Athlete Ally.

I think these developments are a good resolution.  It looks like we are headed toward having competitive sports involving A) an "open" category (open to everyone, including women and biological males who "identify" as women) and B) a "women's only" category (limited to actual, biological women).  

I would like to hear thoughts and assessments on these developments, as they have an effect on the trans movement, and speak to some of its ideology.  For example, the video quotes Lia Thomas (f/k/a William Thomas) responding to the World Athletics announcement as follows:

It seems like equivocations (such as "trans women are women") and accusations of bigotry/transphobia (see SeekingUnderstanding's comment above) have been essential components of arguments in favor of trans women (that is, biological males) in women's sports.  I think these arguments, innately flawed as they already were, will only be further weakened by the course being taken by World Athletics, World Aquatics, UK Athletics and Swim England.  I suspect more and more governing bodies will adopt this approach.

Thoughts?

Thanks,

-Smac

Edited April 5, 2023 by smac97

[Hamilton Porter]

A lot of trans people try to flip their sexual orientation, with some reported success. We should do a study on that. Right now we only have anecdotes.

[Calm]

 

19 minutes ago, Hamilton Porter said:

A lot of trans people try to flip their sexual orientation, with some reported success.

CFR please

[Hamilton Porter]

28 minutes ago, Calm said:

 

CFR please

https://archive.nytimes.com/tierneylab.blogs.nytimes.com/2007/12/11/turning-homosexuality-on-and-off/

[Calm]

4 minutes ago, Hamilton Porter said:

https://archive.nytimes.com/tierneylab.blogs.nytimes.com/2007/12/11/turning-homosexuality-on-and-off/

Quote

This morning, I received an email from a transsexual 5 years into her hormone therapy. She told me she regularly modifies her libido and orientation with diet and drugs. She even sent me a scientific reference explaining why her regimen might work. Now that is amazing research.

Assuming she is not sexually fluid by nature and it is diet and drugs…one person is not “a lot”.

Doesn’t satisfy the CFR…this is asking for curiosity, so no rush.  Would prefer quality research even if it takes longer.

Edited April 5, 2023 by Calm

[Hamilton Porter]

1 minute ago, Calm said:

Assuming she is not sexually fluid by nature and it is diet and drugs…one person is not “a lot”.

Doesn’t satisfy the CFR…this is asking for curiosity, so no rush.

It is if she's representative, and I'm assuming she is.

Like I said, we should do a study.

[Calm]

3 minutes ago, Hamilton Porter said:

I'm assuming she is.

That is a massive assumption especially since there could be other reasons.  Do you always state your opinions as fact?  Serious question as it will help in interpreting your comments and I won’t be troubling you with CFRs as often if this is confirmed as true.  Save both of us time and effort.    

Edited April 5, 2023 by Calm

[Hamilton Porter]

Just now, Calm said:

That is a massive assumption especially since there could be other reasons.

You don't think there's other trans people like her?

[Calm]

13 minutes ago, Hamilton Porter said:

You don't think there's other trans people like her?

I don’t even know if she is “like her” since there was no documentation actually presented, just a claim that might have been based on a misunderstanding of sexual fluidity, which misunderstanding is quite common imo.  Why does she change her diet and drugs in the first place?  Is it to intentionally change her orientation or is that a perceived side effect?  If the first, maybe it is her desire to change that causes her to focus on/emphasize a different part of her orientation while ignoring/suppressing the other rather than actually changing it.  Hard to know anything with the amount of info given.

I believe guesses should not be spoken of as facts nor one person’s experiences automatically passed on to others under the assumption no one’s that unique or whatever.

Edited April 5, 2023 by Calm

[Hamilton Porter]

17 minutes ago, Calm said:

I don’t even know if she is “like her” since there was no documentation actually presented, just a claim that might have been based on a misunderstanding of sexual fluidity, which misunderstanding is quite common imo.  Why does she change her diet and drugs in the first place?  Is it to intentionally change her orientation or is that a perceived side effect?  If the first, maybe it is her desire to change that causes her to focus on/emphasize a different part of her orientation while ignoring/suppressing the other rather than actually changing it.  Hard to know anything with the amount of info given.

I believe guesses should not be spoken of as facts nor one person’s experiences automatically passed on to others under the assumption no one’s that unique or whatever.

You're making this out to be a bigger project than it really is.

This was a long time ago, but I did email Dr. Featherstone about it when the article came out. He said she tries to alter her libido with how much she sleeps.

[The Nehor]

1 hour ago, Hamilton Porter said:

A lot of trans people try to flip their sexual orientation, with some reported success. We should do a study on that. Right now we only have anecdotes.

Most don't try to change it. It often does shift after going on hormone replacement therapy.

44 minutes ago, Hamilton Porter said:

You don't think there's other trans people like her?

That are deliberately modifying their sexual orientation through diet? No, that is not common at all.

If sexuality can be switched back and forth I am both curious and concerned about what it could do to someone like me where it is not just a straight or gay switch.

[Hamilton Porter]

30 minutes ago, The Nehor said:

Most don't try to change it. It often does shift after going on hormone replacement therapy.

Do you have more information on that?

[Calm]

44 minutes ago, Hamilton Porter said:

You're making this out to be a bigger project than it really is.

It is a pretty big claim to state anyone can intentionally change orientation with drugs and diet. 
 

Libido changes with sleep…isn’t that standard protocol for parents of young children?

[Hamilton Porter]

8 minutes ago, Calm said:

It is a pretty big claim to state anyone can intentionally change orientation with drugs and diet. 

LOL no I didn't say anything close to that. I said it's been done before. I said many trans people try to change their sexual orientation to go with their new sex.

[Calm]

3 minutes ago, Hamilton Porter said:

LOL no I didn't say anything close to that. I said it's been done before. I said many trans people try to change their sexual orientation to go with their new sex.

My apologies if you didn’t not mean actual success with “reported successes”.

[Hamilton Porter]

4 minutes ago, Calm said:

My apologies if you didn’t not mean actual success with “reported successes”.

I didn't say "reported successes" I said "some reported success." One trans woman reported some success.

[The Nehor]

9 hours ago, Hamilton Porter said:

Do you have more information on that?

Not really. I just know that hormone therapy sometimes causes sexuality shifts. Not always extreme ones. You rarely lose attraction but you might acquire some. This is all anecdotal though. I have a friend who just started on testosterone and I thought he might lose his asexuality. Not so far though.