Trans women are not women (Part 8)

[Ziggurat]

“Forcing transgender and gender diverse youth through extensive assessments while their cis peers are affirmed in their identity without question conveys to [them] that they are not ‘normal,’ ” they said.

Well, transgender people aren't normal. That's just a fact. We need not attach any moral judgment to it, but it remains true regardless.

 

[theprestige]

Don't you want it that way as well? The only way I can see not having it that way in anything like a country with the usual human rights is to declare all adult trans people incompetent of making decisions for themselves.

Begs the question they're actually trans. Which is the whole point. Normally we require a formal diagnosis from an accredited medical professional, before allowing certain kinds of treatments. There's all kinds of medicines that cannot be prescribed by the patient on their own recognizance, but only by a doctor after proper examination.

Mental health diagnoses should not be left to the patient themselves to decide, nor left to the patient to determine the course of treatment.

A person doesn't diagnose themselves with depression, and prescribe their own antidepressants. The usual human rights have no problem at all declaring that adult manic depressives can't diagnose themselves or prescribe treatment for themselves. Or adult sufferers of BIID. Etc.

The only way your argument makes sense is if trans-affirming treatment is elective, akin to cosmetic surgery. But if that's the way we're looking at it, we're no longer talking about a mental health condition that requires accommodations in public policy. We're talking about people who are in the same category as drag queens and the folks who like to wear fursuits. The same category as people who like to get tattoos or piercings or butt lifts.

 

[Ziggurat]

Don't you want it that way as well?

If someone is an adult, and they pay for their treatment out of pocket, I don't really care much what they do.

If they want to use insurance to cover it, or public funds, then there absolutely need to be standards of care that require meeting criteria before they receive treatment.

The only way I can see not having it that way in anything like a country with the usual human rights is to declare all adult trans people incompetent of making decisions for themselves.

How do you feel about opioids? Should people be allowed to decide for themselves what opioids they need to treat their pain?

Whilst I think there should be regulations, ethics and controls for all medical practitioners and their treatments I can't think of any way of removing self-determination for adults who consider themselves trans that doesn't make a mockery of the idea of self-determination.

That doesn't make any sense. First off, no one wants to completely remove self-determination. Nobody on any side of this thinks, for example, that anyone should ever be forced into transition against their will. So significant self-determination is baked into this from the start from all sides.

But why should medical transition be fundamentally different than any other form of medical care? Patients have input, and they can always refuse treatment, but we don't let patients decide on their own what kind of surgery they get, what kinds of prescription medication they take. We don't allow people to just say, I want an appendectomy, so they get an appendectomy. It's a rather extreme libertarian position to claim that all these other forms of restriction on medical procedures somehow invalidate self-determination, and I'm pretty sure you aren't really a hard-core libertarian. Why is transgenderism so special?

 

[Darat]

This doesn’t really answer my question. In particular, there is no description of how evaluations are actually done and what standards are used. Who gets denied treatment, if anyone, and on what basis? How do they try to weed out people who actually need something other than transitioning?

...snip...

I would be surprised if that amount of detail is easily accessible from the internet for someone not in the NHS. I suggest you contact the various hospitals directly if you think you are competent enough to judge whether their processes, standards and treatments are bad or good. Even within a NHS or a single NHS trust there can be differences in approach and even treatments depending on the consultants in charge of a department.

You could also try NICE - they may have the "gold standard" for treatment in England?

 

[Ziggurat]

I would be surprised if that amount of detail is easily accessible from the internet for someone not in the NHS.

Oh, I get that this isn't really the sort of thing you put front and center on your website.

But the problem I see is that nobody even really talks about this, in any forum.

 

[Emily's Cat]

Don't you want it that way as well? The only way I can see not having it that way in anything like a country with the usual human rights is to declare all adult trans people incompetent of making decisions for themselves. And that really would worry me, I know people, rather I knew they are now dead, who that happened to because the majority of folks considered them mentally ill.

Whilst I think there should be regulations, ethics and controls for all medical practitioners and their treatments I can't think of any way of removing self-determination for adults who consider themselves trans that doesn't make a mockery of the idea of self-determination.

Are there other medical treatments that are based on self-determination without a requirement of medical oversight and diagnosis?

For any other type of insured treatment, we require a diagnosis and appropriate treatment. Cosmetic surgeries aren't covered by insurance.

There is not, and never has been, a barrier to an adult transgender person receiving cosmetic procedures to make themselves appear more like the opposite sex. In the past, there has been a requirement of medical diagnosis to get hormone therapy, although it hasn't been all that difficult to get.

The only hurdle has been with respect to gaining legal recognition as the opposite sex, and having legal documentation changed to reflect that. That, in the past, has required an appropriate diagnosis that justifies changing one's legal sex, as well as documented treatment over a course of time. That's the same as it is in the UK.

 

[Emily's Cat]

A transgender psychologist has helped hundreds of teens transition. But rising numbers have her concerned [LA Times]

I'm certain that this will offend some people, but I do feel that a dose of reality is needed here.

Feeling as if your actual sexed body is completely wrong is *not* normal. Children without dysphoria are not being "affirmed" in their gender identity, they're merely living in the bodies they have without distress. The distress is *not* normal, and I have a serious objection to teaching children that it *is* normal to be distressed about one's sexed body to a point where intervention is required.

 

[Darat]

Are there other medical treatments that are based on self-determination without a requirement of medical oversight and diagnosis?

...snip...

I have never said, nor ever would I say that medical treatments* should not have regulations, ethics and controls for all medical practitioners and their treatments



*Let's not go down the theatre of the absurd show of "oh so an ibuprofen has to be prescribed if you have a headache"

 

[Ziggurat]

I have never said, nor ever would I say that medical treatments* should not have regulations, ethics and controls for all medical practitioners and their treatments

True. But you also haven't drawn any distinction between normal medical regulations and what you consider to be denying self-determination for transgender people seeking medical transition.

 

[theprestige]

One recurring theme in the negative space around the trans-activist position is how they're thoroughly aware that the position is untenable and indefensible.

All this pussyfooting around, this abject terror of stating their actual beliefs in plain language. Just imagine the problem goes away in the future. "I never said..." They have to just keep painting around the position. Sidling out of the bailey into the motte, and then back again. All this effort to get to the desired destination, without having to tell people outright that's where you're trying to take them.

 

[Darat]

Folk are reading between the lines and have managed to read the opposite to what I said.

When I used the phrase "self-determination" I was referring to someone who claims to be trans not being forced into medical treatment against their will!

Therefore regarding seeking treatment, that should be a matter of self-determination. If someone seeks medical help because they consider themselves trans that should be available. The medical treatment should of course be appropriate (hopefully based on good evidence) and should - like any other medical treatment for either a "mental" health issue or "physical" health issue - be ethical, regulated and controlled by the appropriate medical practitioners.

 

[Ziggurat]

Folk are reading between the lines and have managed to read the opposite to what I said.

When I used the phrase "self-determination" I was referring to someone who claims to be trans not being forced into medical treatment against their will!

OK. But... why did you even feel the need to bring that up then? Nobody thinks that anyone should be forced into treatment. There is universal agreement on that point. And that wasn't the question anyone was asking. I was (and others were) asking about when someone should be prevented from getting treatment they ask for.

Therefore regarding seeking treatment, that should be a matter of self-determination. If someone seeks medical help because they consider themselves trans that should be available.

Why? What's different about transgender surgery than, say, an appendectomy? Is getting castrated really the equivalent of a nose job?

The medical treatment should of course be appropriate (hopefully based on good evidence)

First off, if it's not appropriate, then even you don't want it available, which contradicts your prior sentence. More importantly, though, it's exactly the question of what's appropriate which is at stake here. How is this determination made? Because it looks like for the most part it's not really made at all.

and should - like any other medical treatment for either a "mental" health issue or "physical" health issue - be ethical, regulated and controlled by the appropriate medical practitioners.

And what are the ethics, what are the regulations, and who is an appropriate provider?

You seem to have faith that this stuff (ethical guidelines, regulations, etc) all exists, and it works, and the professionals in charge really know what they're doing. But... what if they don't? Because I don't think they do. I think many of the people involved are just making it up as they go along. I think there basically are no checks and balances in the process, that once someone says they're transgender, there's nothing which actually subjects that claim to real scrutiny before extreme and irreversible measures are taken.

 

[Meadmaker]

Folk are reading between the lines and have managed to read the opposite to what I said.

When I used the phrase "self-determination" I was referring to someone who claims to be trans not being forced into medical treatment against their will!

Therefore regarding seeking treatment, that should be a matter of self-determination. If someone seeks medical help because they consider themselves trans that should be available. The medical treatment should of course be appropriate (hopefully based on good evidence) and should - like any other medical treatment for either a "mental" health issue or "physical" health issue - be ethical, regulated and controlled by the appropriate medical practitioners.

I think the confustion came in when you responded to my statement

"In the US, there is effectively no impediment to medical transition once someone reaches their 18th birthday, and trans rights activists want it that way."

And you responded starting with

"Don't you want it that way as well?" (emphasis in original)

I think that I, and lots of other people, thought that your comments about self determination were related to that response.


As noted earlier, my answer to your question is "No, I do not want it that way."

Based on your subsequent writing, it would seem that you want "regulations, ethics and controls for all medical partitioners", and providers of gender affirming care (i.e cross sex hormones and the like) should therefore be governed, by regulations, ethics, and controls.

You also emphasized that I was saying the same thing you were by saying, "All you are saying is that there 'should be regulations, ethics and controls for all medical partitioners' - which is what I said...."

So, if you and I are saying the same thing, it would seem we both agree that there should, in fact, be impediments to receiving gender affirming care. As I put it, in the post to which you were responding with the quote above, it's ok to make people "jump through some hoops".

 

[TomB]

So, if you and I are saying the same thing, it would seem we both agree that there should, in fact, be impediments to receiving gender affirming care. As I put it, in the post to which you were responding with the quote above, it's ok to make people "jump through some hoops".

I think the question is what hoops, how many, and how far off the ground are they.

Some might think that ten years of therapy might be a reasonable requirement (hoop).

Others may think that filling out a form is too onerous.

Hopefully, most are somewhere in the middle.

 

[Darat]

I think the question is what hoops, how many, and how far off the ground are they.

Some might think that ten years of therapy might be a reasonable requirement (hoop).

Others may think that filling out a form is too onerous.

Hopefully, most are somewhere in the middle.

I would hope so but for some reason people want to focus on what the extremists want and allow the extremists to set the agenda.

 

[Graham2001]

An opinion piece in the Washington Post which gives one trans-gendered individual's thoughts on their decision to undergo gender re-assignment surgery in the 1990s and the complicated personal issues that have resulted from that decision.


I found it an interesting read and definitely thought provoking.

When I was 19, I had surgery for sex reassignment, or what is now called gender affirmation surgery. The callow young man who was obsessed with transitioning to womanhood could not have imagined reaching middle age. But now I’m closer to 50, keeping a watchful eye on my 401(k), and dieting and exercising in the hope that I’ll have a healthy retirement.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opin...decide-about-transgender-surgery-at-nineteen/

 

[Rolfe]

This is an extremely good article (no paywall from this link as far as I know, at least not at the moment).

Women won’t be silent as our rights are stolen

Women have since relearnt an ancient lesson: if we don’t defend our rights, no one else will. A policy analyst told me she’d read that trans prisoners including rapists were housed in Scottish women’s jails and wondered idly if an impact assessment had been conducted into the effect on female inmates. She checked. There had not. Puzzlement turned to concern and anger.

Gradually women realised they’d been looking the other way while lobby groups, especially Stonewall, were secretly urging government bodies, charities or businesses to redefine womanhood and strip our rights. They were easy to persuade: the default expectation is we must consider others’ feelings even at our own cost. Women were astonished that, for example, Girl Guides allowed male teenagers to self-identify into female overnight accommodation. Who signed that off?

 

[lionking]

This is an extremely good article (no paywall from this link as far as I know, at least not at the moment).

Women won’t be silent as our rights are stolen

Very good article.

Meanwhile in Australia a candidate in the upcoming federal election is under fire for criticising transwomen in female sports, to the extent that politicians from her own party are calling for her to be disendorsed.

https://www.9news.com.au/national/s...ion-2022/c1ab5bc4-f33c-4f66-854d-c2a75d4dfc53

Mr Morrison's comments came after NSW Treasurer Matt Kean, also a Liberal, called for Ms Deves to be disendorsed.

She will most likely not win the seat, but it will be interesting to see how she goes.

 

[Meadmaker]

I would hope so but for some reason people want to focus on what the extremists want and allow the extremists to set the agenda.

But it's difficult to understand what you consider extremists.


Has anyone in this thread been advocating anything that you consider "extreme". Have any countries among the sorts of places where forum members tend to hail from (i.e places like US, EU nations, Australia, etc.) implemented policies you consider extremist?

 

[shuttlt]

I would hope so but for some reason people want to focus on what the extremists want and allow the extremists to set the agenda.

The extremists pretty much always set the agenda. They are more motivated and better organized. By the time middle of the road people wake up to what the extremists have been up to, the extremists have decades of work behind them and lots of sleepy people who assume their cause must be good... just as Stonewall have. The extremist is the one with the positive vision of some great change they want to enact that gets them out of bed day after day to push their vision when there is no immediate hope of implementing it, conservatives only come on to the scene to resist when it is almost too late.

If by extremists you mean on each end.... well.... that just ends up with the extremists on the end of progress winning in more steps.