Cont: Transwomen are not women - part XI

[Robin]

It's hard to keep track of the claim now.

It seems to be the evil LGBT online community brainwashing lesbians into becoming straight trans men to be the top of the gay hierarchy. All from anonymous hearsay.

 

[Robin]

I think you misread my post, I am sure the world is appalled by irremediable damage to countless born natural homosexual humans.

You were replying to my post where I pointed out that I was being called evil because I didn't accept dubious claims based on weak hearsay evidence.

I would actually need proper evidence for the rest of the claims too.

 

[Samson]

You were replying to my post where I pointed out that I was being called evil because I didn't accept dubious claims based on weak hearsay evidence.

I would actually need proper evidence for the rest of the claims too.

The evil was about drugs and mutilation to innocent youth, not your useful posts.

 

[Robin]

The evil was about drugs and mutilation to innocent youth, not your useful posts.

Again, I was called evil above. Not by you. . I was told I was unconcerned about child abuse which, if it was true, would make me evil.

So it seems that people around here are pretty free and easy with their accusations of evil.

So I'm not doubting what you say, I'm just sayong that if someone like me gets flamed with accusations like that just for questioning a small part of the evidence then how am I supposed to take the rest of the claims seriously?

 

[Robin]

Please stop lying. I did not say what you claim I said.

So this is some other lionking accusing me of being unconcerned about child abuse is it???

All because I questioned a small part of the evidence.

Something, of course, which Robin will fail to address. Rather than being concerned about the fate of minors abused by Tavistock, or even research the proven abuses (Keira Bell) some people are happy to sit back and mutter “bigot

 

[Robin]

BeSo, what I have questioned is:

1. I said that it was unlikely that autism is being mistaken for GD given how well understood the.symptomd and indicators for autism are.
2. I said that there doesn't seem to be any evidence of autism being mistaken for GD or examples of the kinds of symptoms that are being mistaken.
3. We should wait to hear all sides of the story on detransitioners since there are some discrepancies in they stories which need to be clarified.
4. It is highly unlikely that parents are pushing their kids into a transition because they are homophobic but trans accepting, given that trans gender are the least accepted group of the LGBT community and any evidence supporting the claim is weak hearsay.

Apparently all this means I don't care about child abuse.

 

[lionking]

So this is some other lionking accusing me of being unconcerned about child abuse is it???

All because I questioned a small part of the evidence.

I said “some people” and I didn’t use the word evil, but otherwise spot on…

 

[lionking]

So, what I have questioned is:

1. I said that it was unlikely that autism is being mistaken for GD given how well understood the.symptomd and indicators for autism are.
2. I said that there doesn't seem to be any evidence of autism being mistaken for GD or examples of the kinds of symptoms that are being mistaken.
3. We should wait to hear all sides of the story on detransitioners since there are some holes in the story.
4. It is highly unlikely that parents are pushing their kids into a transition because they are homophobic but trans accepting, given that trans gender are the least accepted group in the LGBT community and any evidence supporting the claim is weak hearsay.

And where is the evidence for these pronouncements?

You must have heard "what can be asserted without evidence can also be dismissed without evidence." These statements of yours are so dismissed.

 

[d4m10n]

So Hannah Barnes says that Matt Bristow said that some clinicians said that some other clinicians said...

What better source can a journalist like Barnes hope for—while trying to understand how the Tavi went pear-shaped—than someone like Bristow, who worked at GIDS for several years?

He's not a gender critical activist, he's just a doctor trying to do no harm to his patients.

https://twitter.com/psychomologist/status/1153301937565130753

 

[lionking]

What better source can a journalist like Barnes hope for—while trying to understand how the Tavi went pear-shaped—than someone like Bristow, who worked at GIDS for several years?

He's not a gender critical activist, he's just a doctor trying to do no harm to his patients.

https://twitter.com/psychomologist/status/1153301937565130753

Yes, one of the brave whistle blowers motivated only by concern for the young victims.

 

[Ziggurat]

That's not a straw man. You actually said I should trust a video by Jordan Peterson over 13 years of getting independent expert opinion.

I said you should listen to what detransitioners say happened to them. They know that better than your experts who never met them, and who likely never even talked to you about them. Plus what you claim they said is just hearsay here, so you can't even live up to your own standards. You keep proving that straw is all you have.

 

[lionking]

I said you should listen to what detransitioners say happened to them. They know that better than your experts who never met them, and who likely never even talked to you about them. Plus what you claim they said is just hearsay here, so you can't even live up to your own standards. You keep proving that straw is all you have.

The other thing that came out of Barnes’ book is that Tavistock went from lying that there were any detransitioners at all to concocting figures showing very low rates. Although it is still uncertain about exactly how many do detransition (largely due to Travistock refusal to follow up on patients) some latest figures show it to be around 10%. An even higher percentage regret transitioning but do not want to go through any further trauma.

https://academic.oup.com/jcem/article/107/10/e4261/6604653?login=false

 

[Ziggurat]

The other thing that came out of Barnes’ book is that Tavistock went from lying that there were any detransitioners at all to concocting figures showing very low rates. Although it is still uncertain about exactly how many do detransition (largely due to Travistock refusal to follow up on patients) some latest figures show it to be around 10%. An even higher percentage regret transitioning but do not want to go through any further trauma.

https://academic.oup.com/jcem/article/107/10/e4261/6604653?login=false

The refusal to even try to follow up on long term results is perhaps one of the most unconscionable aspects of this whole thing. From the start they should have known that these treatments were essentially experimental. Good faith belief that treatments would help them isn't enough, you've got to actually measure results. And not just with a questionaire one month after treatment, but years after. Because even if the detransition rate is only 1%, it's a horrible experience for that 1%. So even if treatments are wildly successful for the remaining 99% (which they don't even know that), you should also be trying to figure out if you can screen out that 1% so that nobody receives treatment that they regret. But there's no possibility of doing that if you don't do long term follow-ups. The failure to do so is a deliberate choice which has no ethical justification, and should have been recognized as such a priori.

 

[d4m10n]

The refusal to even try to follow up on long term results is perhaps one of the most unconscionable aspects of this whole thing.

Probably the most disturbing chapter in Barnes' book is Ch 19, all about how GIDS avoided gathering data on their patient population. Not even talking about follow-up studies, just basic data on how many patients in each age cohort were on which treatment pathways. At one point—around page 354—she resorts to eyeballing data collected for a Ph.D. dissertation from a chart published in a scientific paper because both Tavistock and UCLH disclaimed possession of the actual source data.

...even if the detransition rate is only 1%, it's a horrible experience for that 1%. So even if treatments are wildly successful for the remaining 99% (which they don't even know that), you should also be trying to figure out if you can screen out that 1% so that nobody receives treatment that they regret.

I do not disagree, but I think it is even more complicated than this, because there is no assurance of a non-regretful outcome using either approach. Watchful waiting plus talking therapy may outperform puberty blockers followed by cross-sex hormones in most cases, or it may be the reverse, but if we had access to all the possible worlds we'd find that some individuals are depressed and regretful regardless of which pathway they choose, while other patients are happy with their outcomes either way.

If we start off with a large sample of gender-nonconforming (GNC) youths referred to GIDS, they could be binned into four basic categories based on how they would turn out given differing treatments:

1. Regretful following blockers/CSH; satisfied when dysphoria resolves during puberty
2. Regretful when denied blockers/CSH; satisfied when medically transitioned
3. Satisfied when medically transitioned; satisfied when dysphoria resolves during puberty
4. Regretful following blockers/CSH; regretful when denied blockers/CSH

I know we're basically talking about Dr. Strange multiverse **** here, but these are the four possible outcomes even when we simplify the problem down to only good or bad outcomes and only two possible treatment modalities (the one used by Tavistock prior to the Early Intervention Study, and the one typically used today).

There is an implicit assumption in much of the discussion that all GNC patients will be satisfied with only one possible treatment and dissatisfied with the other, but there is really no reason to assume this is actually true.

 

[Ziggurat]

I do not disagree, but I think it is even more complicated than this, because there is no assurance of a non-regretful outcome using either approach.

Good point. The reverse is also possible: someone might be satisfied with or without medical transition. We've got basically no idea of the efficacy or the actual best practices, because the data is so bad.

 

[Robin]

I said “some people” and I didn’t use the word evil, but otherwise spot on…

So this is what I am saying.

You think it is reasonable, when I question a small part of the.evifence, for you to lie and pretend I questioned all the evidence.

Please confirm that you think it is totally OK.for you to lie like that.

And that this is the standard of evidence you accept.

 

[Robin]

And where is the evidence for these pronouncements?

Do you really expect me to bring you up to date on what you refused to read in the first place when you seemed to think you were justified in lying and implying I was questioning all the evidence.

 

[Matthew Best]

Michael Shermer (publisher of Skeptic Magazine) has weighed in:

"To be clear: when @jk_rowling says that MTF trans are not women she is simply stating the scientific definition of sex. Biological males produce small gametes (sperm); biological females produce large gametes (eggs). MTF trans cannot produce eggs so by definition are not women."

https://twitter.com/michaelshermer/status/1636160521325142016

 

[Robin]

What better source can a journalist like Barnes hope for—while trying to understand how the Tavi went pear-shaped—than someone like Bristow, who worked at GIDS for several years?

He's not a gender critical activist, he's just a doctor trying to do no harm to his patients.

https://twitter.com/psychomologist/status/1153301937565130753

As I said, if you are happy with "So Hannah Barnes says that Matt Bristow said that some clinicians said that some other clinicians said ...,," type evidence for a suspect claim the I am not going to tell you what your standard of evidence should be.

And if other's standard is that a detransitioners story should be filtered through Jordan Peterson even though the unfiltered testimony shows a different story, such as Chloe Cole's parents ignoring medical advice that Chloe should not have any medical intervention and.that she should instead seek help for cognitive developmental issues, so they were far from "railroaded, then I can't tell them what their standard of evidence should be.

And if other's standard of evidence that we should believe that autism was misdiagnosed as GD without being able to say what symptoms of autism could have been mistaken for GD or give any evidence that this has happened then I can't tell them what their standard of evidence should be.

 

[d4m10n]

As I said, if you are happy with "So Hannah Barnes says that Matt Bristow said that some clinicians said that some other clinicians said ...,," type evidence for a suspect claim the I am not going to tell you what your standard of evidence should be.

What makes you think Bristow is lying about his own firsthand experiences at Tavistock?

Sent from my Declasse Yosemite using Tapatalk