I think, being rational, most people here would acknowlege the fact that body dysphoria is a real and serious condition
This misses the point that what is being pushed by trans activists has nothing to do with gender dysphoria. In fact, it is central to the agenda that one does not need to have gender dysphoria to be transgender (note: not that one does not need a diagnosis; one does not need to have dysphoria at all). This is the basis of reframing the movement in terms of identity rather than dysphoria (the existence of gender dysphoria does not 'validate trans identity', contrary to what is being implied - these are concepts largely in opposition to each other). The ideology TRAs are pushing is based on Queer Theory, which is a heavily postmodernist theory largely originating from gender and cultural studies, and explicitly not scientific.
The political interference in this area is opposed by most of the key theorists responsible for developing current knowledge of gender dysphoria, which is why these researchers are attacked by TRAs.
and that transitioning treatments seem to work for the most part.
There is a serious lack of methodologically sound long-term follow-up studies of transitioning, but the best research available does not really support this.
A key study supporting positive effects of surgical transitioning was methodologically flawed and recently subject to a published correction.
What researchers have pointed out is that those who had positive experiences with transitioning tend to become activists and assume that everyone is like them. In contrast, those who desist from dysphoria do not become activists, and de-transitioners are shunned. There are no recent long-term follow-up studies of de-transitioning. Researchers and funding bodies are terrified to address detransition due to the power of activist lobby groups.
Moreover, what research is available is based on outcomes under the 'gatekeeper' model where transitioning was confined to those with a long history of persistent dysphoria, which is now being abandoned.
And, being rational, most people probably also readily accept the fact people suffering from it have been victims of most hideous persecutions and violence - and many still are all over the world.
As others have said, this isn't consistent 'all over the world' at all.
And, bit more daringly, I'm sure for the most part people here do accept that gender and biological sex are both meaningful and separate concepts. A certain respect and sensitivity probably would not be anti-rational or anti-sceptic, or would it?
They are separate concepts, but only sex has objective and materially real definition. Definitions of gender have never been sound and are based on politics and fashion, which is why they form the focus for political activism. Reification of gender identity to replace biological sex as a defining and protected characteristic is anti-rational, anti-scientific and regressive, in my view. Aside from that, having separated sex and gender, 'deconstructed' biological sex, and reified gender identity to replace it, it appears the fashionable trend is now to say that sex and gender are in fact the same thing with identity sacrosanct and sex mutable, being surgically 'corrected' to fit.
“If we telescope forward to 2019, one of the interesting things in terms of politics is that many progressive parents - and putatively liberal progressive clinicians - have adopted an essentialist view of gender, which totally contradicts classical feminist theory…….. which is one of the things that makes this area so migraine-inducing - it’s very hard to keep up with what’s politically fashionable.”
Dr Ken Zucker, Chair of the Sexual and Gender Identity diagnostic working group for DSM5.
