TERFs crash London Pride

[Mycroft]

There's no evidence either way.

Exactly. Therefore assertions and speculations accomplish nothing more than expressing the prejudices of the person making them.

 

[kellyb]

Exactly. Therefore assertions and speculations accomplish nothing more than expressing the prejudices of the person making them.

So the notion that none of the young transmen today would have just been lesbians if they were born 20 years ago and, and that there's not a decrease in the numbers of young butch lesbians is just an expression of the prejudices of the people claiming that?

 

[quadraginta]

<snip>

Forcing transpeople to "jump through hoops" is what the trans community means by gatekeeping. Anything that's not the informed consent model is some type of gatekeeping.

Go back and review the section you quoted in bold just a few posts above;

Medical providers who feel comfortable making an assessment and diagnosis of gender dysphoria, as well as assessing for capacity to provide informed consent (able to understand risks, benefits, alternatives, unknowns, limitations, risks of no treatment) are able to initiate genderaffirming hormones without a prior assessment or referral from a mental health provider

That sounds a lot like "gatekeeping" to me. Those doctors willing to accept an informed consent model still make a call about the patient's fitness and appropriateness for the treatment.

They can still refuse the treatment. They can still say, "No".

That's "gatekeeping" no matter how you try to handwave it away.

Sure, there may be some doctors somewhere who are less than responsible about the way they make their assessments, but there is nothing in what you have offered as evidence which suggests that it is some sort of frequent occurrence, as you seem to be suggesting.

Why do you think that doctors abrogating their responsibility to make such assessments in a responsible fashion is the standard rather than the exception?

 

[kellyb]

Go back and review the section you quoted in bold just a few posts above;

​

That sounds a lot like "gatekeeping" to me. Those doctors willing to accept an informed consent model still make a call about the patient's fitness and appropriateness for the treatment.

They can still refuse the treatment. They can still say, "No".

That's "gatekeeping" no matter how you try to handwave it away.

Sure, there may be some doctors somewhere who are less than responsible about the way they make their assessments, but there is nothing in what you have offered as evidence which suggests that it is some sort of frequent occurrence, as you seem to be suggesting.

Why do you think that doctors abrogating their responsibility to make such assessments in a responsible fashion is the standard rather than the exception?

I'm entirely unsure what you think I'm suggesting or what point you're trying to make in response.

Lithrael had said "ASSESSMENTS and COUNSELING and TAKING IT SLOW and QUESTIONING and ENCOURAGING INTROSPECTION and all that stuff you seem to think everyone wants to abolish, are STANDARD", and whereas that used to be true, it's not any longer.

 

[Mycroft]

So the notion that none of the young transmen today would have just been lesbians if they were born 20 years ago and, and that there's not a decrease in the numbers of young butch lesbians is just an expression of the prejudices of the people claiming that?

Without evidence, that should be your default assumption.

Do you disagree? Why?

 

[Darat]

I'm entirely unsure what you think I'm suggesting or what point you're trying to make in response.

Lithrael had said "ASSESSMENTS and COUNSELING and TAKING IT SLOW and QUESTIONING and ENCOURAGING INTROSPECTION and all that stuff you seem to think everyone wants to abolish, are STANDARD", and whereas that used to be true, it's not any longer.

I think you are mistaking that today it is as simple as going to a clinic and getting a prescription. (As others have said there may be quacks who do that but it would be unethical and probably open them to a malpractice suit.)

The "consent" makes sense when you consider the history of how trans folk were treated by the medical profession in the past. I remember seeing a groundbreaking BBC documentary 1979 (and its follow-ons) and back then the attitude towards a man (at the time) who was seeking to change sex by his psychiatrist was absolutely disgusting, arbitrary and to quote the wikipedia article "disparaging"). That attitude was terrible for people, they really were treated as if they were being prosecuted and made to jump through arbitrary loops and perform for their doctors.

That had to change, and apparently has but what is being described isn't that it should be changed to "Oh I feel like a man" - "OK Here's a prescription" but that they are treated as we all should be by the medical profession when we have a medical issue.

 

[Rolfe]

Whether or not it's the case that anyone can say "I feel like a man" and immediately get a prescription, there's no doubt at all that politicians are working to bring in legislation by which all a man has to do is say "I feel like a woman" to gain comprehensive no-restrictions access to women's changing rooms, sleeping accommodation and sports competitions. No prescriptions at all required. Or even a razor.

 

[ponderingturtle]

So the notion that none of the young transmen today would have just been lesbians if they were born 20 years ago and, and that there's not a decrease in the numbers of young butch lesbians is just an expression of the prejudices of the people claiming that?

Well none of the trans men I know are straight. So with my sample set trans men are more likely to be gay/bi.

 

[kellyb]

Without evidence, that should be your default assumption.

Do you disagree? Why?

There is evidence, but it's not strong enough to qualify as "proof".

There's the 4 thousand percent increase in females self-identifying as transmen, and you can look at reports of how many/most of these women self-identified recently, like this:
https://www.vice.com/en_us/article/dp54xa/how-trans-men-deal-with-their-shifting-sexuality-129

Prior to my transition, I definitely considered myself a lesbian for sure,"

Prior to his transition, filmmaker Jake Graf identified as a lesbian and had never had any inclination towards men

Before I transitioned, I considered myself a lesbian," says New York-based writer, Emmett Lundberg.

...and while we don't yet know how many among the 4 thousand percent increase will eventually regret it and detransition, it's not "spotting a unicorn" style rare.
http://guideonragingstars.tumblr.co...male-detransition-and-reidentification-survey

 

[kellyb]

I think you are mistaking that today it is as simple as going to a clinic and getting a prescription. (As others have said there may be quacks who do that but it would be unethical and probably open them to a malpractice suit.)

The "consent" makes sense when you consider the history of how trans folk were treated by the medical profession in the past. I remember seeing a groundbreaking BBC documentary 1979 (and its follow-ons) and back then the attitude towards a man (at the time) who was seeking to change sex by his psychiatrist was absolutely disgusting, arbitrary and to quote the wikipedia article "disparaging"). That attitude was terrible for people, they really were treated as if they were being prosecuted and made to jump through arbitrary loops and perform for their doctors.

That had to change, and apparently has but what is being described isn't that it should be changed to "Oh I feel like a man" - "OK Here's a prescription" but that they are treated as we all should be by the medical profession when we have a medical issue.

I'll repeat what I said upthread:

Part of me actually agrees with the notion of simple informed consent, especially since on the reddit boards a lot of people talk about doing HRT "DIY", which I guess means black market or ordering the meds online. And also, "gatekeeping" historically does sound like it was completely oppressive just 10 or 15 years ago, like some sort of long and invasive trial before a judge.

I just want us to all be operating from the same fact base when we're talking about this stuff.

 

[luchog]

I'm not sure how I feel about it, either. Part of me actually agrees with the notion of simple informed consent, especially since on the reddit boards a lot of people talk about doing HRT "DIY", which I guess means black market or ordering the meds online.

That has always existed in the trans community, for multiple reasons. And will continue for multiple reasons, not least of which is the sheer expense of the process when done through medical channels.

And also, "gatekeeping" historically does sound like it was completely oppressive just 10 or 15 years ago, like some sort of long and invasive trial before a judge.

I'm not sure oppressive is quite the right word, but it was certainly fraught with social and cultural baggage that was both unnecessary and counterproductive in the long term. Much of that baggage has been progressively shed in the last few decades, but obviously there is still some remaining.

It might be the nature of the informed consent I'd need to know about to make a call either way.

You think you should actually understand something before pontificating upon it? Really?

I really do find this worrisome, though:

https://vimeo.com/185178522

I think she might be considered one of the world's leading "experts" on transgenderism in children.

You "think" she "might"? Maybe take the time to find out for sure if she is before holding her up as an example?

Little hint, it's not a good idea to get your information on the subject from out-of-context quotes provided by anti-trans crusaders like 4thWavenow. I mean, seriously, you're using manipulated info provided by a group whose members use terms like "the queering of curriculum" and "compelled pronoun speech" entirely unironically. I expect this sort of nonsense from Rolfe, not from you.

But of course, you'd know all that, having done your homework instead of just throwing out random bits of 2-minute Google searches.

 

[Darat]

I'll repeat what I said upthread:



I just want us to all be operating from the same fact base when we're talking about this stuff.

Yes we should but I don't think your quoting from the clinic website factually proved your point.

 

[Darat]

...snip...

I'm not sure oppressive is quite the right word, but it was certainly fraught with social and cultural baggage that was both unnecessary and counterproductive in the long term. Much of that baggage has been progressively shed in the last few decades, but obviously there is still some remaining.
...snip....

It was, if you ever get a chance watch the documentary I mentioned earlier. It was a positively inquisitorial and at times almost seemed to be designed to cause distress and place obstacles in the way. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Change_of_Sex

 

[kellyb]

Yes we should but I don't think your quoting from the clinic website factually proved your point.

That's why I came back with more and better evidence, too.

 

[luchog]

There is evidence, but it's not strong enough to qualify as "proof".

There's the 4 thousand percent increase in females self-identifying as transmen, and you can look at reports of how many/most of these women self-identified recently, like this:
https://www.vice.com/en_us/article/dp54xa/how-trans-men-deal-with-their-shifting-sexuality-129

By comparison, look at the huge increase in Autism diagnoses since the 1990. Is that evidence that vaccines or other medical practices cause Autism? Or that autism-activists are forcing more people to become autistic?

Or might it be, in both cases, that recent research has improved our understanding of these conditions, and social pressures changed enough that people are more able to comprehend and express their true natures. Autism is better understood and no longer being misdiagnosed as "general mental retardation" or dismissed as "discipline problems". Likewise, trangenderism is becoming better understood, and FtM transgendered people no longer being dismissed as "butch lesbians".

There is no more an "epidemic" of people being forced into being trans, than there was an "epidemic" of children being made autism. There was simply an increase in our understanding and social acceptance, as the science improves.

And the increase in the number who are actually transitioning is not due to pressure from mythical shadowy trans-activists, it's a reflection of the improvement to the medical science and technology involved.

 

[kellyb]

You "think" she "might"? Maybe take the time to find out for sure if she is before holding her up as an example?

Little hint, it's not a good idea to get your information on the subject from out-of-context quotes

She's the director of one of the biggest pediatric gender clinics in the country, maybe in the world. If she's not one of the leading "experts", who is?

Did you listen to what she said?

 

[kellyb]

By comparison, look at the huge increase in Autism diagnoses since the 1990. Is that evidence that vaccines or other medical practices cause Autism? Or that autism-activists are forcing more people to become autistic?

Autism is the exact analogy I was thinking of. It's a medical diagnosis, though (unlike "lesbianism") so it was really easy to demonstrate "diagnostic substitution".

Likewise, trangenderism is becoming better understood, and FtM transgendered people no longer being dismissed as "butch lesbians".

Dismissed? That's how they see themselves. That's an important and meaningful part of their self-identity. And they are glad they came of age before SR meds and surgery were common. Unaltered sexual organs are important.

And the increase in the number who are actually transitioning is not due to pressure from mythical shadowy trans-activists, it's a reflection of the improvement to the medical science and technology involved.

Some of it's almost definitely social contagion.

How else can you account for stuff like this?

A 14-year-old natal female and three of her natal female friends were taking group lessons together with a very popular coach. The coach came out as transgender, and, within one year, all four students announced they were also transgender.

A 14-year-old natal female and three of her natal female friends are part of a larger friend group that spends much of their time talking about gender and sexuality. The three natal female friends all announced they were trans boys and chose similar masculine names. After spending time with these three friends, the 14-year-old natal female announced that she was also a trans boy.

 

[kellyb]

Likewise, trangenderism is becoming better understood, and FtM transgendered people no longer being dismissed as "butch lesbians".

I just have to add, that attitude is WHY lesbians are doing the whole "get the L out" thing, and freaking out about "lesbian erasure".

There's an unavoidable baked-in assumption there that all the older bulldykes are really just transmen in denial or something.

I really don't know how that particular type of pro-trans-rights activism can be reconciled with the classic cry of "we're here, we're queer, get used to it."

 

[luchog]

She's the director of one of the biggest pediatric gender clinics in the country, maybe in the world. If she's not one of the leading "experts", who is?

Did you listen to what she said?

I listened to a very small clip of what what clearly a much longer session, edited by a known anti-trans crusader organization.

Did you listen to what she said in context? I don't know about you, but I'm always suspicious of out-of-context quotes. And reading her actual writing online, her emphasis for pre-adolescents is social transitioning. Not medical. You've been here long enough to know that context is critical.

 

[kellyb]

I listened to a very small clip of what what clearly a much longer session, edited by a known anti-trans crusader organization.

Did you listen to what she said in context? I don't know about you, but I'm always suspicious of out-of-context quotes. And reading her actual writing online, her emphasis for pre-adolescents is social transitioning. Not medical. You've been here long enough to know that context is critical.

An 11 year old is an adolescent. She mentioned 11 year olds specifically. Nobody's accusing her of wanting to put 5 year olds on the meds and fast-track to surgery.

There's no context that would make what she's saying less pseudo-scientific.

Pediatric gender dysphoria is not like cancer. Cancer meds are only worth the harms because of the diagnostic certainty of the cancer diagnosis and the case-fatality rate in the absence of treatment.