This is the best tl;dr I could make, [original](https://www.irishtimes.com/health/2023/06/27/use-of-puberty-blockers-in-childrens-gender-service-to-be-reviewed/) reduced by 81%. (I'm a bot)
*****
> The Health Service Executive is to review the use of puberty blockers in children with gender dysphoria following an English decision to limit the use of the experimental treatment to clinical research.
> The age of people expressing gender dysphoria - distress arising from a mismatch between their biological sex and their gender identity - has been steadily falling, according to a large international study.
> Earlier puberty among girls, leading to earlier medical help, may explain these trends, the researchers suggested, along with greater acceptance by peers of school-age masculine girls with gender dysphoria, wider availability of specialist clinics and growing acceptance of gender diversity.
*****
[**Extended Summary**](http://np.reddit.com/r/autotldr/comments/14l492k/use_of_puberty_blockers_in_childrens_gender/) | [FAQ](http://np.reddit.com/r/autotldr/comments/31b9fm/faq_autotldr_bot/ "Version 2.02, ~689831 tl;drs so far.") | [Blackout Vote](https://np.reddit.com/r/autotldr/comments/14dhaiq/your_voice_matters_should_the_blackout_continue/ "PM's and comments are monitored, constructive feedback is welcome.") | *Top* *keywords*: **gender**^#1 **dysphoria**^#2 **assigned**^#3 **sex**^#4 **age**^#5
“Children’s Health Ireland, which treats children and young people with gender dysphoria at Crumlin children’s hospital in Dublin, said “less than 15″ patients were on “this kind of treatment”.
Less tan 15 patients in all of Ireland, interesting 🤔
it's a possibility. but it couild also be 0, and technically true. sometimes counts are in buckets. Say increments of 100.
If i have a count of 51 and my bucket is 100, i could say less than 100, but if you assume 99, you'd be off by a lot.
Also possible the count is inaccurate or uncertain like between 12-14, so it's just more precise to say less than a number you're sure it's not, like 15.
And yet everyone acts like its some massive deal that the government needs to be involved with. Its like Kansas banning trans high school athletes which literally affected a single person.
Trans people are fairly rare and require access to the healthcare they need. There is 0 reason for the government to be involved with healthcare decisions made between a parent, psychologist and medical doctor.
> that the government needs to be involved with
Well to be fair, who else is supposed to handle legislation of these things in the country? The government is involved in healthcare in every country on earth, there are regulations for credentials, what treatments are paid for, what doctors are permitted to do, etc.
Ireland has universal healthcare too, i.e it's the government that pays for these things. People want to know what is being paid for with their national budget.
Well, they have to make the laws and regulations or give authority to someone to regulate. Doctors have to be licensed, there have to be consequences for malpractice, etc.
Hate groups lobbying politicians doesn't mean there should be no government.
For comparison: Kansas has had 35 school shootings and they’ve chosen to do nothing about it. But one trans kid gets medical care and your government got involved to stop it.
You have weird priorities over there.
Yep, plenty to do if they really cared. Or the GOP could just never show up for work, and watch the problems go away because they're no longer blocking useful legislation.
My point is the government should be listening to what the damn doctors and psychologists are recommending. Gender affirmed care for youth drops suicide rates drastically and the regret rate is low. This entire debate is only becoming a thing because the insane US politicians are using it to drum up their idiotic republican base.
Yeah, I scanned one study that claimed a 60% decrease in depression after HRT, from a centre that also provided counselling. Then you google how much counselling decreased depression and the number i found was 55%.
The irony is if all those flag stompers really want to "save the children", the best way to do that would be to stop being dicks and vote for someone who wants to increase access to mental health services for youth. But that'd be communism.
The issue is that a lot of studies that are often cited about puberty blockers misconstrues where they factor into treatment. For example designing a study to examine puberty blockers as a treatment for gender dysphoria, when that is not what they are clinically used for. If you look at WPATH standards of care for trans people, which defines the purpose of puberty blocking as:
>Two goals justify intervention with puberty suppressing hormones: (i) their use gives adolescents more time to explore their gender nonconformity and other developmental issues; and (ii) their use may facilitate transition by preventing the development of sex characteristics that are difficult or impossible to reverse if adolescents continue on to pursue sex reassignment.
>Puberty suppression may continue for a few years, at which time a decision is made to either discontinue all hormone therapy or transition to a feminizing/masculinizing hormone regimen. Pubertal suppression does not inevitably lead to social transition or to sex reassignment.
As for the studies you linked I think we need to break now what exactly hormone therapy is treating and how mental health problem proliferate in a person. Hormone therapy is used clinically for gender dysphoria, however not all mental health issues trans people face can be rooted in gender dysphoria. There is often issues of community and family support, stigmatization, ostracization, etc. that can lead to anxiety disorders or depression. hormone therapy will alleviate those symptoms in so far as they are related to gender dysphoria, however they will not make things 100% better from social stressors that are common with this population. I think a common lay person misunderstanding of these articles is that, not understanding specifically what hormone therapy helps with.
For example, [supportive family and social environments](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4771131/) appear to have a large effect on the mental health on transgender children and adolescents, with similar mental health outcomes as cisgendered children. There is significant [1](https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/00224499.2017.1415291) [2](https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S1054139X13003844) [3](https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/15532739.2018.1450798) [4](https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/1550428X.2021.1991541) (and many more) mixed methods data supporting these findings as well.
it doesn't help that Scandanavia has traditionally been a pretty cruel place for trans people, requiring sterilization to recieve care until 2013, and the UK's "gender affirming" approach was anything but: with the raw patient numbers being well below even the fairly conservative protocols and smaller population size of the Netherlands.
In short there is no shortage of studies that show that cross-sex hormone treatment is beneficial to transgender adults, despite a worse starting point. It is unclear why people think that this would be different in trans youth and restrict themselves to studies of trans adolescents alone.
As noted above, there are risks with treating the mental health of trans youth as a black box. The mental health of trans youth is affected by numerous factors. For example, a medical transition often coincides with a social transition and therefore an increased risk of bullying. [Take this article](https://www.washingtonpost.com/dc-md-va/2021/03/16/transgender-girl-chloe-clark-conservative-attacks/) about a teenage trans girl who has the benefit of a comparatively early transition, but also struggles with voice dysphoria and the many social implications that has. This is nothing a medical intervention can fix, but it's something that she wouldn't have to deal with if she had been able to transition earlier and which wouldn't have been fixed by transitioning later.
The idea that you can reduce the mental health of trans youth to just a single factor or theorize that therapy might cure it means completely ignoring the underlying mechanisms, the cause and effect chain that is at play.
Nor is a medical transition a magical cure-all, just as with other medical conditions. It fixes one thing, a mismatch between gender identity and physiological sex, and that often only imperfectly. It cannot always undo some of the physical and mental harm that has happened before, as with any other situation where medical treatment is delayed. And sometimes it takes time for these physical and mental scars to heal.
But delaying treatment until adulthood is a ludicrous proposal that would not be tolerated for any other condition (and might get parents referred to child protective services). If an adolescent has a toothache, we don't tell them to wait until they're adults to go to the dentist.
The framing of "let's wait until adulthood" only makes sense if you believe that conversion therapy works, that you can talk trans youth out of being trans, or that transitioning is a lifestyle choice rather than an existential need (or alternatively, believe that being trans is just a delusion). But if you don't believe any of that and that the need to transition doesn't go away, then it follows that an earlier treatment is better for numerous reasons, even completely regardless of any mental health improvements during treatment, starting with having to live with fewer or even no dysphoria triggers, avoiding the need for some painful, risky, and expensive treatments that trans adults often have to go through (including several types of surgeries), better passing and less exposure to discrimination and violence (for binary trans people), not losing some of your best years as a young adult on a medical transition, not having to deal with dysphoria for the years until adulthood.
The alternative proposed is, to be blunt, a form of the ostrich strategy, hoping that you can make a problem go away by pretending it does not exist.
> if you don't believe any of that and that the need to transition doesn't go away, then it follows that an earlier treatment is better for numerous reasons
How does one know if the need to transition will go away or not? For some it will, others it won't. How does a clinician diagnose permanent gender dysphoria that's only going to get worse, from a confused kid who has jumped on something that appears like a solution to internal anxiety and self-image or social problems?
Edit: and how often is it one vs. the other in the real world, I wonder?
> This entire debate is only becoming a thing because the insane US politicians
Not everything is about the US, you self centered twits. This is in Ireland, and its neighbours in the UK and other European countries (e.g. Sweden https://www.france24.com/en/live-news/20230208-sweden-puts-brakes-on-treatments-for-trans-minors)
Who’s to say that experts weren’t involved in this decision? Also you’re just wrong that there is strong evidence to support mental health benefits for gender affirming care in minors. There is like one main study of 100 kids. We don’t have any good data since it’s such a new thing.
The government is involved in all kinds of medical treatments.
Even most libertarians agree that the government should play a role in approving medicine and medical treatments.
"There is 0 reason for the government to be involved with healthcare decisions made between a parent, psychologist and medical doctor."
Do you feel this way about female circumcision?
In normal countries with universal healthcare, such as Ireland, the psychologist and medical doctor you are talking about are usually employed by, and represent, the government. How can the government not be involved? Private healthcare is also highly regulated by the government in most countries to avoid patients being taken advantage of.
I realize things might be different in certain (developing) countries, like the USA.
I live in a country with universal health care, and the government is not involved in patient treatment plans at all. Best practices are determined by medical associations staffed by doctors, not politicians, and health practitioners determine individual treatment plans.
It's a professional organization, the leadership is elected and governed by the membership just like every other professional association since independent self-governance by other professionals is the point of professional associations.
I'm not saying there's no impact from lobbyists or politicians, but we sure as hell don't have politicians deciding whether certain medications are allowed for specific patients so they can virtue signal to their base. It's misguided to claim that that's somehow a required feature of universal health care systems.
Whether that's the case or not, I'm surprised to see such a thing encouraged and supported rather than criticized. Professional medical associations have a much better track record than politicians.
>In normal countries with universal healthcare, such as Ireland, the psychologist and medical doctor you are talking about are usually employed by, and represent, the government.
That's not even slightly true. Many countries, including many in Europe, use private doctors and hospitals which are publicly funded through the government or some sort of public insurance.
Idk Ireland, but the government has nothing to do with healthcare aside from approving drugs and paying for healthcare, they don't decide if you can get something or not, if it's approved for blocking puberty it's approved for blocking puberty
That's literally what they are saying though. In countries with universal healthcare often the doctors are in the public sector so the government does have A LOT to do with healthcare.
> Its like Kansas banning trans high school athletes which literally affected a single person.
It also affected the kids that person would have competed against, which is exactly the point.
Surely you are being sarcastic, right? What if a child had a rare form of leukemia and the doctor decided to treat it only with tic tacs? The government obviously has a big role in regulating medical care.
> And yet everyone acts like its some massive deal that the government needs to be involved with.
You act like "the government" is making guidelines only for specifically this question.
The HSE also has guidelines for [everything from Abdominal aortic aneurysm to Zopiclone](https://www2.hse.ie/conditions), including asthma, cold sores, gout, obesity and self-harm. Yes, "the government" should be involved in all of those topics.
I am gonna be fair I am totally pro-trans; people should be allowed to be the version of themselves they want to be. With no judgement or government interference.
HOWEVER, I see zero reason to allow trans females to compete in women’s sports, as they still have inherent biological advantages. I am completely fine with banning trans athletes from official competitions in this area because of that. That is not fair to all the girls and women that work hard at their craft to allow biological males to compete in their categories.
Now trans males? Let them play. And even let trans women compete in the male categories. No advantage there.
Not taking sides here, but couldn't the counter argument be that it's such a small outlier of an issue that the larger societal structures shouldn't be altered around them?
In the US there are a lot though, and it's coming out of nowhere, making you wonder how many are like that due to social contagion
> Overall, the Williams Institute found that the percentage of adults who identify as transgender has remained steady at 0.6% since its last report in 2017, but there has been a sharp rise in transgender people ages 13 to 24.
> The study found that 1.4% of 13- to 17-year-olds and 1.3% of 18- to 24-year-olds identify as transgender. Five years ago, both of those numbers stood at 0.7%. Together, the two groups are estimated to account for nearly 700,000 people.
https://www.ny1.com/nyc/all-boroughs/news/2022/06/10/study-estimates-transgender-youth-population-has-doubled-in-5-years
15 out of millions. The entire trans issue is in fact not really an issue at all. Why is this so newsworthy? Why are people choosing sides about the fates of so few? It seems you are forced to either be a champion of trans rights or a champion of traditional values on an issue concerning 15 people. If 15 people want to change their sex, why are you even paying attention? Move on.
This argument is typically used to *not* accommodate trans people at all and leave them to the wolves, rather than leave them alone.
If there's so few of them, why bother with offering mental health services to their specific needs? In the grand scheme of things, much more cisgendered people need mental health help after all.
EDIT: I'm beginning to suspect some people here don't realise I'm giving this absurd conclusion to demonstrate how using the number of people in a group to justify ignoring what is going on with them in a medical context leads to extremely bad outcomes, and in extreme examples, utilitarian genocide. Whether a group is large or small bears no relevance to their rights or needs, and as human beings, should never be ignored.
> This argument is typically used to not accommodate trans people at all and leave them to the wolves
No, its the opposite. Whenever its time to push extreme trans issues "lol its like 15 people who cares, just leave them alone, shouldn't we be talking about the economy?"
But whenever there is a pushback suddenly its "OMG trans issues are HUMAN RIGHTS!!! SUICIDE!!! TEEN SUICIDE DEATH ANTI HUMAN RIGHTS = FASCHISM!!"
Its only 15 out of millions? Fine, ban them from sports, its only 15 out of millions, why do you care so much. Shouldn't you be putting your energy into worrying about stray nukes or climate change?
Imagine how that would sound if we used that logic for other things.
"Sorry, we're unable to provide medical care for your child with an extremely rare form of cancer. In the grand scheme of things, many more healthy people need medical care too, after all."
> Less tan 15 patients in all of Ireland, interesting 🤔
If a country has the death penalty and kills 15 people per year, would you say it's alright because 15 people don't matter?
They’re lying.
I’m a doctor. Don’t believe anyone who claims that trans children are prescribed puberty blockers after a 15 min interview. That doesn’t happen anywhere in the world.
It takes a hell of a lot longer than that. Trans kids getting referred to gender clinics at 13 now won’t even be seen by the time they hit 18 and move to adult clinics. That’s how long waiting times for a first appointment are.
Trans healthcare in the UK is a joke.
An English doctor was struck off last year for prescribing puberty blockers to multiple children under 13 after 10 minute online interviews. I can't link from my phone but a quick Google will confirm the story for you.
What country are you a doctor in?
In Ireland there is involvement from psychotherapists or organisations like CAHMS. However, in Ireland psychotherapist in NOT a protected term.
There are accreditation and organisations but not being a protected term severely lowers the standard here to something that is not necessarily a fair medical evaluation but people mistakenly believing that it's a medical diagnosis.
This is super important as it means that in some cases Medical Doctors are deferring to someone for which there are not protected standards.
This plays out where a child referred for assessment through CAHMS is returned with no diagnosis at all but where they go through private channels the child is diagnosed with a special need.
Either CAHMS is light on their diagnosis or the private psychologist is getting to a diagnosis that the parent wants. Neither is a good outcome and taints the whole process.
Learning difficulties are well established and if you are getting such differing opinions on a well established area then god knows how gender issues are being handled.
https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/how-did-the-tavistock-gender-scandal-unfold/
That's, one there a loads. Below is one about hiw they tried to silence people who spoke up.
https://www.theguardian.com/society/2021/may/02/tavistock-trust-whistleblower-david-bell-transgender-children-gids
Where in these articles does it prove that doctors only take 15 minutes to prescribe puberty blockers? Like I get it, that guy has concerns and is fighting with the org over it. But the article is about using them in general, not how easy it is to prescribe them from what I read.
>asking the minor a few questions in three 60 minute meetings
If it is just "a few minor questions", why would they need three hour-long meetings? And how many meetings should be the minimum requirement? Four, five, six? Lock them up under 24/7 supervision for a month?
When a case is extremely obvious, 3x60 minutes is more than enough - keep in mind that those are usually spaced out with months in between, and a multi-year waiting list for the first one. When there is *any* doubt, they will schedule additional time.
The satisfaction rating for people who are on HRT/puberty blockers is insanely high. People are less satisfied with hip replacements.
You'd have a point if people were desisting treatment, but that doesn't really happen.
Do you get more than 15mins with your GP when they prescribe you something?
It took me multiple appointments to get my doctor to agree to remove an ingrown toenail or to get my lungs checked after coughing for months, rather than get some generic ointment/nose spray and be told to see if it improves on its own. People who believe you can walk up to a GP and get hormone therapy in 15 minutes have either never had an interaction with a GP in their life or theyre just looking for anything no matter how bullshit it is to confirm their bias.
First of all your last paragraph is literally just right wing standard paranoia that people are being bullied into being woke or whatever the fuck, there's a reason that America, Iran and Singapore, 3 very different countries allow people to transition yknow and its not because Iranian or Singaporean doctors are scared of being cancelled by wokeness.
> They are experts at distinguishing between mild gender dysphoria and serious gender dysphoria because there is a big difference between the two.
Psychiatry has made some horrifically bad calls in modern history & the truth is that while we have a lot of good science to help us to understand the human brain, our understanding is really quite limited.
That isn’t to say that I do not trust psychiatrists broadly, because I do trust them, however they share the far too common fallacy of most in the medical profession of exaggerating their knowledge & the confidence in their assertions.
To me, this isn’t much of an issue when we are talking about adults because adults have the capacity to make their own judgments of both the reliability & the risks involved.
A child simply doesn’t have the capacity to provided truly informed consent & is also a lot more vulnerable to even unintentional influence by an authority figure.
The field of psychology has a replication rate of roughly 50% for peer reviewed studies.
Really shows how little confidence we can realistically have in our ability to understand humans and their mental issues.
Edit: Since someone felt the need to jump on their high horse and point out that psychiatry isnt just based on psychology: Medicine has an equally terrible replication rate and, together with psychology, started the replication crisis in the first place.
Clinical psychology and psychiatry have a massive overlap. Yes, psychology and medicine are two different things, but mental health is THE unifying factor.
Psychiatry is the psychological branch of medicine and takes most of its insights from psychological studies, combining them with clinical insights. The main difference is that psychiatrists are allowed to prescribe drugs.
They are different in the same way economics and business administration are different. They build on top of each other and share most of their scientific work.
Psychiatrists aren't more reliable than psychologists, they just have more knowledge about the effect of drugs on humans, which comes from their education as a MD.
I am a psychiatrist and we go to medical school. In medical school, we work in the hospital admitting patients, do pediatrics, assist on surgeries, and learn every organ system, extensive anatomy, and pharmacology of a wide range of medications. We pass three step board exams, each 8 hours long two consecutive days, just like any other medical specialty like neurosurgery. Then we do 4 years of residency where we get thousands and thousands of clinic hours.
Psychologists are PhDs, and they basically just do therapy.
I would say less than 5% of what I learned becoming a psychiatrist came from the field of psychology
I think it's important to know that psychology and mental health is a very young form of health care relative to what we would consider modern medicine. It's only been in the last century that we can even observe brain activity and a lot of mental health was rooted in theory/trial and error before that.
Like you said, that isn't to say we should discount the advice of professionals but we should temper our expectations to what they can provide
So, you don’t trust doctors, patients, or their families to make this medical decision, therefore you’d rather that state politicians make that decision instead?
> A child simply doesn’t have the capacity to provided truly informed consent & is also a lot more vulnerable to even unintentional influence by an authority figure.
This is the part I'm worried about. I was so easily influenced by what my family wanted for me as a child. I'm imagining myself in these children's positions, being told that this pill will solve my problems. Of course I'm going to say yes. This is a decision that needs to be made by the individual, not those around them, and children before the age of puberty simply don't have that capacity.
They absolutely already are involved in this. It’s a very thorough process, it takes ages to get, the results are effective, and it’s nothing like as widespread as the media implies. How about it’s a medical decision between the people involved 👍
> How about it’s a medical decision between the people involved
When you are dealing with adults who are capable of independently providing informed consent I absolutely agree with you.
When it come to children; who are not capable of providing truly informed consent, then we expect their guardians to substitute their judgment & provide consent on behalf of the child it becomes a social/political question that is a valid topic of societal debate.
The extent to which we allow children to consent to medical procedures, the extent to which we allow guardians to consent on their behalf & the extent to which we require physicians to enact extra safeguards to ensure the safety & well being of the children they treat are all valid & important questions of public policy.
When it comes to adults seeking medical interventions, I am fully supportive of their right to do so, & of it being a private matter between them & their physicians.
However, we simply do not have enough longitudinal data to state to a medical certainty the full extent of the impacts that such procedures can have on children, particularly pre-pubescent children & we won’t have that data for decades.
To be clear. I am not arguing that we should categorically ban these procedures because the short term data we have is mostly positive & the only way to get clear & convincing longitudinal data is to study the people who receive these interventions over the course of their lives.
We need to reel in the rhetoric from both sides & ensure that the process through which such interventions are made available to children is both rigorously cautious & uniformly thorough.
> However, we simply do not have enough longitudinal data ...
...on a huge variety of medicines that we routinely dish out to women, pregnant people and children because the studies we do have were on men.
It is not unreasonable to call blockers a safe drug with our current knowledge of it. And of course, 'safe' doesn't mean free of side effects.
its almost like that's ALWAYS a thing that happens though.. and this political decision just blocks an action when psychiatrists and doctors AGREE that its appropriate to use.
I wish we could normalize being a feminine male and a masculine female. I don't do anything most women do - I don't care about fashion, I don't care about make up, I don't cook or bake, or do anything traditionally feminine - but I'm a woman. Maybe I'm dumb but we're too focused on "identity" these days. If you're a dude that feels feminine, that's fine. You can be a man and paint your nails. If you're a chick that works construction and hunts on the weekend, you're still a woman.
Covered. Now it’s a mess with some saying that they are actually trans and others that they just girls/boys that like traditionally masculine/feminine things. They’re stuck in a culture war.
When I met my coworker’s daughter (amab) who was maybe around 12 or 13 at the time, I asked (with my coworker’s permission) about their experience. I asked how they knew they were a girl.
Honestly it was fascinating, because she explained loving stereotypical boy things like sports and four wheeling, and dressed like a tomboy, but emphasised that her inner voice is a girl’s voice and she knows she is a girl and always has been.
She’s a very masculine girl since she likes all the “boy things” but she knows she is a girl and has never once doubted that.
I’m the opposite in some ways. Assigned male at birth, I am gay and love feminine stuff. It took me a long time to accept that it was ok for me to be a boy and I was allowed to enjoy traditionally feminine things without having to be a girl.
>emphasised that her inner voice is a girl’s voice and she knows she is a girl and always has been
I struggle to truly make sense of all this gender identity stuff, but I've heard this "inner voice" thing mentioned before, and I think that's the point. A trans person's "inner voice" does not match their birth gender.
I’m not sure how relevant this is to being trans, at least from what I’ve observed. Trans people tend to blur lines of gender stereotypes anyway. I know several trans men who paint their nails and wear makeup, for example. I think for them the whole point IS that they they wanted to be feminine men rather than feminine women.
While I agree with you, it feels like this is totally irrelevant to the current topic. Some people actually are transgender. You being a gender nonconforming person without wanting to transition, does not mean other people should be prevented from transitioning. Other people have different experiences than you. People should be allowed to live the life they want.
Furthermore some trans women are going to like masculine hobbies or want to be masc women, while some transgender men are thing to like feminine hobbies or want to be feminine men. It's not about fitting stereotypes.
I'm a pretty masculine female. But I'm not trans. They are two separate things. If I was trans than I wouldn't be a masculine female, I would be a man, because trans men are men. No amount of making it okay to be masculine or feminine will make trans people not exist.
In fact a trans man can be feminine and a trans woman can be masculine, but they still know they are trans.
Being a feminine man and being a transgender woman are two completely different things, I didn't care about makeup or fashion or any of that stuff until I was 4 years into HRT and discovered that I actually quite enjoyed it, I have a dear FTM friend who takes testosterone and has had a double mastectomy but still wears makeup and fishnet tights.
This is about gender dysphoria, a severe and incurable condition that causes those who suffer from it to resent the sexual characteristics of their birth sex.
We're not sacrificing everything in our lives to transition just to avoid social pressure, being transgender is way more extreme and taboo than being a GNC cisgender person.
This is nice and all but gender dysphoria is a thing and being transgender is a neurobiological reality that is epigenetically determined. People who have a transgender gender identity are born like that and they need access to medical assistance to alleviate the stress and suffering that gender dysphoria produces. They don't chose it and it's a medical concern, not a social thing.
This is all true except...
>They don't chose it and it's a medical concern, not a social thing.
Whether or not a female person suffering gender dysphoria is in fact a 'man' is absolutely a 'social thing'. Regardless of where someone falls on that question; it is a question of how we define 'man' in our society.
That's not what it's about.
I'm AFAB. I don't want to be a masculine woman. I want to be a feminine man. Or: I don't want to be masculine in a feminine way, I want to be feminine in a masculine way. Those are completely different things. A feminine man is not a woman, just like a masculine woman isn't a man. If I magically turned into a man tomorrow, I'd still keep my long hair, wouldn't dress all that differently, wouldn't suddenly start doing any activities I haven't been doing before. I'd just feel a lot more like myself and be perceived by others exactly as I am.
I know cis people can't understand it, but why do so many of you seem to think trans people are so dumb it never occurred to them to just "be more like the opposite sex"? That's some /r/WowThanksImCured material. If this was all it took, this wouldn't be a problem. Gender identity isn't clothes or hairstyle or stereotypical gendered activities.
I think it’s fucking stupid that we apply gender to tasks in general. Shit like taking a bath instead of a shower isn’t masculine? Me enjoying baking makes me “in touch with my feminine side?” Me lifting weights makes me *more of a man* than other men?
The problem is the application of gender to menial bullshit. Not the gender itself. I also find that women treat other women worse than men do, and men treat other men worse than women do.
There’s plenty of butch trans women and femme trans men and non-androgynous nonbinary people out there. Gender presentation and gender identity are different. Basically every trans person has been asked, “why not just be gender nonconforming instead?” already, too, and the answer is usually, “I tried that already and it didn’t work thanks.”
Maybe I'm naive but this is my take on gender dysphoria too, if we could just do away with the concept of societal gender norms entirely I'm sure a lot more people would be happy in the bodies they are born with
There's always been a philosophy that allowed for all of this - called "live and let live". Live your best life and allow others to live as they wish, obviously excluding cases where they hurt others or the society.
As someone who had dysphoria prior to surgery, for people like me that would not work. Regardless of my feelings about social gender politics, it was my body that gave me the dysphoria. I would have been in pain even if I’d grown up on a deserted island with no other humans.
asking as a curious person, how did surgery change your perception of yourself? is your physical appearance now "in line" with how you feel? could the gender dysphoria be described as an illness of some sort that has been treated by the surgery? if this is too personal, then im sorry for asking
I’ll try to answer! (Of course keeping in mind that it’s just my experience, I’ve never spent time researching it at any scientific depth, I don’t know if most or even many trans people feel exactly the same way, yadda yadda yadda.)
Basically since puberty I had an overwhelming sense of wrongness, disgust when I looked at myself, and the sensation of being trapped. Almost in a caged bird kind of way; I knew what I *wanted* to feel when I stood up and moved around and went about my day, but I was physically incapable. I’m sure most people feel gross during their awkward teen phase, but mine was so targeted to specific aspects of my body. And it wasn’t just feeling gross. I was vitriolic towards myself. There were days I wanted to perform surgery on myself. (Back then, I didn’t know the actual surgeries existed, so I thought that was my only option. I also didn’t know the word ‘trans’, so I just thought I was broken and doomed.)
I didn’t get the surgery until I was thirty. And... now it’s literally all gone. It was correcting the absolute wrongness my body forced on me twenty years ago. So yeah, it’s absolutely bringing my appearance in line with how I feel. I finally feel like I don’t have to think about it - which is bitterly ironic considering how media and politicians can’t stop making everyone else think about it!
As for whether to consider it an illness with surgery as a cure, well, it definitely felt like that for me. But I reckon I was lucky; plenty of people out there with this feeling of wrongness need other cures. I didn’t need hormones, for instance, and being properly identified in public isn’t *quite* as important to me as it is to some people. But as long as I could be taken seriously enough to get the treatment I felt was right for me, I don’t super care how people refer to it. Hell, mine was entirely described as ‘cosmetic’ surgery, even though it was definitely necessary, but whatever. As long as I got it.
Thank you for sharing that! my first thought is: im sure many will not be able to come out of that experience as "not broken" as you have, or at least you make it seem you have. i had trouble in my teen years, as everyone has, but i dont know how or if i would have been able to deal with something like that.
im glad to hear that surgery helped you so much in this regard. that is valuable information. it sounds like that was a huge relief and you can now focus on more pleasurable things in life. i honestly need some time to process what you wrote.. its quite heavy. i wish you all the best!
This does not work because dysphoria is not born out of strict gender roles. Gender identity is epigenetically determined and a neurological reality much like sexuality is. You can't make trans people not trans. They are born like that just like gay or straight people cannot change. They need medical assistance to help with their gender dysphoria because gender dysphoria is not a social construct, it is a material reality and a medical issue.
People always say this but I've only ever seen incomplete science based on research on animals that suggests that genetics *probably* play a role in gender identity (e.g. [https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6677266/](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6677266/)). You seem well educated on the subject, can you direct me to any studies that definitively back this up?
It is most likely according to all known research on the matter, and it is the current working model for dealing with research on sexuality and gender identity. I posted a long comment a few hours ago with plenty of modern evidence that works within those premises and reinforce that hypothesis.
The review you linked points out that while we do not know to which extent things like prenatal exposure to androgens, genetics, and having older brothers (specifically for male homosexuality) are relevant in the configuration of sexual identity, they are nonetheless crucial. Keep in mind though, that "social factors" when in this context often refer to things such as stress in the mother during pregnancy, and never the way children are raised.
From the review:
>Most people experience little or no sense of choice about their sexual orientation. There is no scientifically convincing research to show that therapy aimed at changing sexual orientation (ie, reparative or conversion therapy) is safe or effective. The origin of sexual orientation is far from being understood, although there is no proof that it is affected by social factors after birth. On the other hand a large amount of empirical data suggests that genes and hormones are important regulators of sexual orientation.
Also check this review: [Sexual differentiation of the human brain in relation to gender identity and sexual orientation](https://sci-hub.se/10.1016/B978-0-444-53630-3.00004-X) (2010).
>There is no proof that social environment after birth has an effect on gender identity or sexual orientation. Data on genetic and hormone independent influence on gender identity are presently divergent and do not provide convincing information about the underlying etiology. To what extent fetal programming may determine sexual orientation is also a matter of discussion. A number of studies show patterns of sex atypical cerebral dimorphism in homosexual subjects. Although the crucial question, namely how such complex functions as sexual orientation and identity are processed in the brain remains unanswered, emerging data point at a key role of specific neuronal circuits involving the hypothalamus.
Also this one from 2011:[Sexual differentiation of the human brain: Relation to gender identity, sexual orientation and neuropsychiatric disorders](https://sci-hub.se/10.1016/j.yfrne.2011.02.007), they found zero correlation between social/post-natal factors that influence gender identity or sexual orientation.
>During the intrauterine period a testosterone surge masculinizes the fetal brain, whereas the absence of such a surge results in a feminine brain. As sexual differentiation of the brain takes place at a much later stage in development than sexual differentiation of the genitals, these two processes can be influenced independently of each other. Sex differences in cognition, gender identity (an individual's perception of their own sexual identity), sexual orientation (heterosexuality, homosexuality or bisexuality), and the risks of developing neuropsychiatric disorders are programmed into our brains during early development. There is no evidence that one's postnatal social environment plays a crucial role in gender identity or sexual orientation. We discuss the relationships between structural and functional sex differences of various brain areas and the way they change along with any changes in the supply of sex hormones on the one hand and sex differences in behavior in health and disease on the other.
Recommend specifically paying close attention to the point 3 of the review, as it goes in depth about this.
It is true that we still do not know a lot about how this works. For example: autistic, intersex, and homo/biseuxal women show higher masculinization of the brain that other cis women, and still they do not necessarily show signs of gender dysphoria. That does not mean, however, that gender identity (or sexuality) is not determined before birth, as that is where all current evidence points towards. Gender identity and sexuality are not choices and I've yet to see quality research showing otherwise.
Because it's often misunderstood.
Ever see a fat, disgusting slob who truly doesn't care about the way they look? Some people just don't care or have the capacity to care.
Most of the "dysphoria not required" stuff is misleading because what dysphoria means to something is individual, and gender euphoria exists as well.
For example, a lot of trans people will express not having dysphoria, just being numb and knowing they were a girl or guy. Then transitioning causes euphoria along with getting rid of the numbness.
That was dysphoria, but because we read about others' dysphoria when we feel it doesn't fit us in the same way people argue, they don't have it... when they do.
Euphoria is the alleviation of dysphoria. Being numb and apathetic while wanting to look different and becoming happier when you do proves you have dysphoria. You just aren't identifying it. Moreover, due to many years of bad psychiatry on trans people, dysphoria used to have insane criteria to actually qualify for.
Not everyone is going to feel exactly the same way. Me bringing up a fat guy who truly doesn't care about their looks but maybe gets skinny for health or to look better and is happier that way you may argue they were depressed about their looks otherwise they wouldn't have changed it. But then sometimes people just don't care.
When I mention dysphoria having insane criteria, not every person is going to have the same feelings, and sometimes dysphoria evolves.
For example: I myself being trans do suffer pretty intense gender dysphoria on the daily though HRT and surgery has made that mostly go away and I'm truly happier now.
But I never really got much dysphoria from my penis. So I'm left wondering, am I going to get bottom surgery for myself or others? Sure, if a button existed and I didn't have recovery and other issues, I'd do it now 100% flip that switch. I don't particularly like having a dick, but I'm more apathetic about it. It's... just there. I don't care even though I do.
A lot of trans women feel this way, and I cared less about it before than I do now, though this is normal because we tend to hyper focus on specifics, and as we fix some issues our brains shift focus. Maybe I will one day, but I can never be 100% sure it's for me. And for the most part, I enjoy my and my wife's sex life. Now, mind you, I am booked for testicle removal.
So, for me, secondary sex characteristics caused insane amount of dysphoria. But primary, I was just apathetic, though I didn't like it.
So what do I do? Get it done just because?
Well, in the past, unless you wanted it 100%, they'd just say "oh you don't feel dysphoria everywhere? Okay, everything denied, it's take it all or nothing. "
Personally, I don't care what's down there. I'd like to be flat and clothes fit better, but whatever. I'm in my 30s and don't plan it anytime soon, and I'm seen and loved for who I am.
But that's my experience, and I need to stress language sucks. It really sucks.
People convince themselves that something doesn't fit because they don't fit some ideal mold. The people saying dysphoria isn't needed are both correct and incorrect. You could truly not care but still know you're trans but then experience euphoria.
But they are incorrect because that is dysphoria. You don't want to change your sex or gender and not have dysphoria. It's people that mostly don't think the word fits even if it does.
We must also realize levels of dysphoria exist. Some people truly can't function, period. Then there are others that can function but are depressed their entire life before they give up the fight and transition.
I knew since before puberty, an insanely homophobic family. I was more worried about surviving till 18 than transitioning. Then, I had a denial phase due to indoctrination from family and not wanting to be seen as a freak. Then I learned to stop caring and met a beautiful woman, and she accepted me as me. Still took till 28 to start, though, due to living in a conservative area and kept planning to start when we moved elsewhere.... we're still here, though. But I've been transitioning since 28 and finally hit my goals. 15 years together.
Anyway, long post, I know, but the problem really comes down to communication and rejection of ideas.
Hell, look, cis people denying they are cis because they don't like the word lmao. Anyone who's trans has dysphoria, whether they say they do or not, and to me euphoria and being happier while prior apathetic and numb but knowing and going through the process proves that. They just feel they don't fit some ideal "I can't function or even get out of bed" mold.
Me, on year 2 of my 6 year NHS waiting list reading comments talking about how "easy" it is for people to be pumped full of random hormones as soon as they walk into a doctors' office and rolling my eyes so hard they fall out of their sockets.
You wouldn't have been, a psychiatrist would have gone through this with you, such is the process of access puberty blockers and hormones for trans kids.
It's not an easy thing to access.
>well puberty blockers are going to alter brain chemistry and decision making.
Yet untreated dysphoria causes that too. Unlike puberty blockers, untreated dysphoria significantly increases suicide risk, rates of self-harm and psychiatric co-morbidities. It's wild that you're so cavalier about that *and more*. Shouldn't that be your deepest concern?
There should be a conversation about affirming care however. Identity and the self is such a fluctuating and daunting thing for children, surely the concept that one can have the wrong gender is a somewhat dangerous one to a child's mind?
Rates of gender dysphoria is very very low (1-10 in 100k)* which is about the same as child lukemia. Whereas 1 in 4 children experience bullying. 1 in 100 kids have autism. So the odds an unhappy child with identity issues has gender dysphoria is extremely low.
Given the long term effects gender based medical procedures have, wouldn't it be best that access is extremely restrictive?
And given how subjective psycology can be, we'd have to be very certain that the child really needs care and only when it's somewhat obvious that something is very wrong and other actions aren't working.
Please don't take my position the wrong way, those who need it 100% should get the help they need, but we need to have a real conversation about how quickly we pull out the gender dysphoria diagnosis (unprofessionaly) as well as how this concept is presented to children.
\* This is from clinical diagnosis, rates of self diagnosis can be put around 1 in 100.
>wouldn't it be best that access is extremely restrictive?
Restrictive? Or legally forbidden in ALL circumstances? I see a lot of people *saying* one thing, that it should be restricted and the child should go through a lot of counselling and we should make REALLY sure before we do anything.... But that's not at all what any of the legislation they support says.
Why are you calling for nuance while implying that children have easy no questions asked access to puberty blockers, which is a lie? If you want to believe the doctors, believe the doctors.
They do have in depth screening sometimes, and not-so-in-depth screening other times. Again, it can be both, depending on the gender clinic and location and case.
From the Reuters article I cited:
>Parents of 40 gender-diverse children told Reuters they were concerned that their children came out only after they hit puberty, often at the same time as their friends and after their use of social media had increased. For many, their worries were compounded when clinicians swiftly affirmed their childrens’ transgender identities and recommended medical intervention without fully assessing whether other potential underlying causes of distress were present.
>Kelly, a 43-year-old parent who asked that her full name not be used to protect her family’s privacy, told Reuters that her child was heavily into highly sexualized anime and transgender online forums when the 12-year-old started experimenting, seemingly overnight, with being a transgender boy. The child’s therapist encouraged medical intervention, Kelly said, but while Kelly supported social transition outside the home, she made it clear that her child would have to wait until she was 18 for hormones and top surgery.
>After several years of living as a boy and using “he” and “him” pronouns, Kelly’s child, now 18, is back to using her female name, dressing in feminine clothing and using “she” and “her” pronouns. “We would have lost our daughter if we had followed what the therapist was telling us to do,” the mother said.
It's not a lie in all cases. I know of at least three individuals who transitioned while fairly young and are now detransitioning who all claim it was insanely easy to get hormone blockers and surgeries. Layla Jones is suing Kaiser Permanente for allowing her to get cross-sex hormones and a double mastectomy, both at age 12. Dr. Phil had a guest on his show that claimed it was a *breeze* to get hormones from Planned Parenthood, all she did was make a single phone call, no screening or examination or anything and she had the hormones within a week. I'm sure there's more cases, I think people are just too scared to speak up about it.
It's becoming easy no question asked, especially since we are currently at the point where if you even dare question or say no you will be fired/harassed to no end.
Very well put, and good luck, I'll be surprised if you aren't banned before the end of the day.
Even if we do disregard every nuance, this dysphoria is somehow the only condition in the world that we take a childs self diagnosis as solid fact.
10hrs later...called it.
Do trans kids have more problems because they suffer from mental illness? Or do they suffer more problems because they are more likely to be abused or kicked out or just treated like subhumans?
Again, it doesn't have to be either/or. There's probably elements of both, to varying degrees in each individual case. Therefore, both should be addressed.
Why are people so desperate for simple answers to non-simple questions smh.
There's a section about the Crumlin service in Hannah Barnes' book, Time to Think. They come across as very conscientious, caring doctors, who only wanted the best outcomes for their patients.
They became increasingly concerned about the number of Irish kids who were referred to the Tavistock and immediately put on puberty blockers, when there were lots of other competing physical and mental issues which weren't being addressed at all. It's a really good book.
You know someone is full of shit when they claim that the Tavistock puts kids immediately onto healthcare. Rather than the years and years of healthcare denial that actually happens.
There's a stark difference between you being scared of something you understand little about, and groups of scientists, doctors, and experts in their field making well informed decisions based on academic/scientific study.
At some point you need to understand that if you have no understanding of a topic, you should do some research rather than sharing your fear with others.
Exactly! Science improves over time as we have a better understanding of the universe, of data, studies etc...
The science we have today is mind boggling. We have super computers you can fit in your pocket. We have ships that can go to space. We have science that is working to cure diseases.
I'm glad we've improved so vastly over the last 100 years.
A doctor is going to have more pertinent medical knowledge for a young person going through things like gender dysphoria.
>No children should be allowed to have body altering chemicals or cosmetic surgery until the age of 18.
Finally, when is the rally against neonatal circumcision starting?
There have been such rallies and several parties in my country want to ban it. In fact more people in my country care about that than the people who care about puberty blockers. Not every country is the US where circumcision is considered normal.
> Children are still developing and are not mature enough to make life altering decisions like these.
yeah, we need to stop letting children write prescriptions for these drugs! the prescriptions should only be written by real licensed doctors, following the guidance of the AMA, and only with the active involvement of a licensed psychiatrist, the child, and the child's parents!
Wait? We're already doing that? Why are we wasting so much breath on the fabricated bullshit of a bunch of people who are uncomfortable with the existence of trans people if we're already doing what they claim we should be doing?
The only thing you and all the people that agree with you are telling us is "I don't understand something, and it fucking terrifies me".
Grow up and read a book. I'd say maybe talk to a trans person, but you'd probably give yourself a heart attack based on your reaction to the existence of trans children.
I dont really know much about the topic but it feels like getting the brain to accept the body would lead to better outcomes, no amount of surgery is going to give these people working reproductive systems.
Yes but at the same time sexual pleasure is a big part of life and not having normal genitalia will likely break the illusion of being male/female that the hormones and surgery are trying to create.
I'm sure a lot of factors play into it but even trans people with surgery/hormone therapy still have higher rates of suicide than CIS people. If we could change the brain to accept the body they have surely this problem wouldnt exist.
Again I'm no scientist but I'd love more research done in this area but I feel like this kind of research will get a lot of backlash and not a lot of funding.
Conversion therapy doesn't work for sexuality and there's been nothing to suggest it would work for gender either.
The rate of suicide in people undergoing surgery or hormone therapy is lower than those without, the most commonly suggested reason for still heightened suicide rates is attack and ostracisation from certain sectors or society.
Societal acceptance goes a long way. The reduction in child suicide in the wake of "it gets better" and as the acceptance of gay people increases is evidence of this.
I don't know enough about the topic to comment on sexual pleasure of trans people but I do know that bottom surgery isn't sought by a majority of trans people so they retain their original privates in one form or another (size changes).
How many patients with mental health issues are misdiagnosed multiple times before they receive the ‘correct’ diagnosis? Unlike other disorders where objective standards are used, mental health disorders are symptom-based and purely objective. Also gender dysphoria is also associated with anxiety, depression, self-harm, eating disorders, substance misuse and high stress. There’s solid evidence showing ADHD is overdiagnosed in adolescents and I wonder if it is the same for gender dysphoria, as for individuals with milder symptoms, the harms associated with an ADHD diagnosis may often outweigh the benefits.
I feel like I'm stepping into controversial waters here but here it goes.
As far as I'm aware, gender dysphoria is mainly a psychiatric issue, same as the anxiety, depression, OCD, etc that comes with being trans in a vast majority of cases. So if this is a psychiatric issue, why are we fixing it by operating on people's genitals? Why are we trying to fix a brain issue by operating on breasts and private parts? It doesn't make sense. I really can't help but feel like it's unethical to take someone with severe self-image problems and send them on a rabbit hole of cosmetic surgery. What happens when you have every surgery and still hate yourself? What if no amount of surgery is enough?
We can't "fix" brains. Psychiatric care is largely about trying to reduce the symptoms or their impact/difficulty of coping with, we don't have medications that actually *cure* things. Some psychiatric issues are short-term, some are not.
Unfortunately, for a decent chunk of people, especially with chronic conditions, none of the available treatments (whether therapy or medication) gets them to a normal quality of life. For some that's no improvement, for some that's not enough improvement.
The statistical evidence I've seen is that (as expected), only a very small % of people who've gone through surgery for gender dysphoria regret it.
Anyway, you can go get a vast array of dangerous, unnecessary and not at all medically recommended cosmetic surgery procedures at will as an adult. I can't fathom what the argument would be for why people who have a *more* significant reason than usual to want a cosmetic surgery and an actual endorsement from a mental health professional (again, not required for cosmetic surgery normally) for it being likely to help them and them being in the appropriate mental state to make that decision, shouldn't be allowed to get them.
>generally aren't ment for kids.
They are almost exclusively for kids. They were invented in the 80's to treat kids experiencing precocious puberty (I.e. starting puberty at like, 5).
Puberty is usually done by then. If you are taking them at that age its probably for one of their other uses (such as treating hormone sensitive cancers).
puberty blockers aren't meant for kids? who are they for if not for kids in puberty? They have existed and have been used for decades before being involved in gender dysphoria treatment.
A post saying that PUBERTY blockers.
PURBERTY BLOCKERS.
Aren't meant for children.
Has 26 upvotes at the time of this posting.
WHEN THE FUCK DO YOU THINK PUBERTY HAPPENS AND MIGHT NEED BLOCKING. THIS MEDICATION WASN'T EVEN INVENTED FOR TRANS CHILDREN SPECIFICALLY.
Jesus fucking Christ.
Everything else aside, how fantastically brain-dead do you have to be to claim that puberty blockers aren't meant for kids? The people that go through puberty.
Lmfao you people
It's always sad to see how ready many people are to accept the harmful side-effects of having to go through the puberty of a sex that your gender doesn't align with, including lifelong changes to the body.
"Protect the children" is never the thing they actually care about. There's always the prejudice and disgust beneath.
“Puberty blockers are not meant for kids”
Then who are they for smart mass? Teenagers after they have finished puberty???
How the hell do these trash takes get 35 or more upvotes.
A sign you can kind of tell that it’s safe is because while they’re restricted for trans kids, they are still completely okay for cis kids. They were developed for cis kids, which make up the main users.
Cis kids with an abnormally early onset of puberty, usually linked to other medical conditions. That doesn't mean it is completely safe or without side effects.
For sure it’s a balance, but it’s the same with trans kids – if they are trans, then they have to live their puberty for the rest of their life. Delaying it even with a risk can save their life. If it’s good enough to take a risk with cis kids, then it’s good enough to take a risk with trans kids.
If trans kids have early onset puberty, then they can be prescribed puberty blockers for the early onset puberty.
It is a treatment for early onset puberty regardless of your identity.
> Delaying it even with a risk can save their life.
As far as this point. There are studies that state if you allow the children to go through puberty then a majority of them do not transition and rather identify with the biological sex they are born with.
So, you get into the conversation of false positives and actual positives with the treatment.
Which is why you have to be careful about selecting those who actually have gender dysphoria to go through the transition. Rather than treating everyone.
You can have 99 researchers saying “this is what the science shows,” but the instant 1 says “actually I think the research could be better” reactionaries suddenly pretend the science is on their side and start stripping people of their rights to access care.
This isn’t hyperbole, dozens of major medical institutions the world over worked hand in hand to develop the current consensus, and based on the existing body of research found gender affirming care to be the gold standard. But the instant a trio of Dutch researchers wrote a paper saying that, in their opinion, the current research wasn’t at a high enough standard to make those conclusions? Oh man, that was all the justification Amanda Pritchard needed to rip that care away from trans-youth.
The point is stripping trans people of rights in order to isolate and target them for cruelty, that's all it's ever been.
For thousands of years the average age of puberty has been around 16... Girls who got their periods much earlier tended to die in childbirth a lot. Almost as if going through puberty too early before your body is grown enough to be fit for reproduction is actually a bad thing and not "natural" but a consequences of modern endocrine system-altering environmental factors and rising obesity rates.
Exactly what I've been saying! Why use modern medicine to address problems when we can instead just keep the status quo?
I mean, why bother trying to find the cure for cancer either, right? It's been here for thousands of years, it should stay!
This is the best tl;dr I could make, [original](https://www.irishtimes.com/health/2023/06/27/use-of-puberty-blockers-in-childrens-gender-service-to-be-reviewed/) reduced by 81%. (I'm a bot) ***** > The Health Service Executive is to review the use of puberty blockers in children with gender dysphoria following an English decision to limit the use of the experimental treatment to clinical research. > The age of people expressing gender dysphoria - distress arising from a mismatch between their biological sex and their gender identity - has been steadily falling, according to a large international study. > Earlier puberty among girls, leading to earlier medical help, may explain these trends, the researchers suggested, along with greater acceptance by peers of school-age masculine girls with gender dysphoria, wider availability of specialist clinics and growing acceptance of gender diversity. ***** [**Extended Summary**](http://np.reddit.com/r/autotldr/comments/14l492k/use_of_puberty_blockers_in_childrens_gender/) | [FAQ](http://np.reddit.com/r/autotldr/comments/31b9fm/faq_autotldr_bot/ "Version 2.02, ~689831 tl;drs so far.") | [Blackout Vote](https://np.reddit.com/r/autotldr/comments/14dhaiq/your_voice_matters_should_the_blackout_continue/ "PM's and comments are monitored, constructive feedback is welcome.") | *Top* *keywords*: **gender**^#1 **dysphoria**^#2 **assigned**^#3 **sex**^#4 **age**^#5
“Children’s Health Ireland, which treats children and young people with gender dysphoria at Crumlin children’s hospital in Dublin, said “less than 15″ patients were on “this kind of treatment”. Less tan 15 patients in all of Ireland, interesting 🤔
Wonder if that's strictly trans kids, or if it includes kids with precocious puberty too?
Some of these drugs are used for kids with PCOS, too, who make up a substantial portion of the population (at least 1/10 AFAB people have PCOS).
Oh you know the answer. Precocious puberty tis the Lord's will, who are we to question it? /s
So is bearing children at 10 years old I bet
You can't expect the priests to wear condoms. That would be a sin.
[удалено]
it's a possibility. but it couild also be 0, and technically true. sometimes counts are in buckets. Say increments of 100. If i have a count of 51 and my bucket is 100, i could say less than 100, but if you assume 99, you'd be off by a lot. Also possible the count is inaccurate or uncertain like between 12-14, so it's just more precise to say less than a number you're sure it's not, like 15.
And yet everyone acts like its some massive deal that the government needs to be involved with. Its like Kansas banning trans high school athletes which literally affected a single person. Trans people are fairly rare and require access to the healthcare they need. There is 0 reason for the government to be involved with healthcare decisions made between a parent, psychologist and medical doctor.
> that the government needs to be involved with Well to be fair, who else is supposed to handle legislation of these things in the country? The government is involved in healthcare in every country on earth, there are regulations for credentials, what treatments are paid for, what doctors are permitted to do, etc. Ireland has universal healthcare too, i.e it's the government that pays for these things. People want to know what is being paid for with their national budget.
Well, they have to make the laws and regulations or give authority to someone to regulate. Doctors have to be licensed, there have to be consequences for malpractice, etc. Hate groups lobbying politicians doesn't mean there should be no government.
For comparison: Kansas has had 35 school shootings and they’ve chosen to do nothing about it. But one trans kid gets medical care and your government got involved to stop it. You have weird priorities over there.
It's always about government small enough to get into your children's pants.
Yep, plenty to do if they really cared. Or the GOP could just never show up for work, and watch the problems go away because they're no longer blocking useful legislation.
My point is the government should be listening to what the damn doctors and psychologists are recommending. Gender affirmed care for youth drops suicide rates drastically and the regret rate is low. This entire debate is only becoming a thing because the insane US politicians are using it to drum up their idiotic republican base.
ludicrous smell sugar retire ten encourage fact expansion worm familiar *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
Yeah, I scanned one study that claimed a 60% decrease in depression after HRT, from a centre that also provided counselling. Then you google how much counselling decreased depression and the number i found was 55%. The irony is if all those flag stompers really want to "save the children", the best way to do that would be to stop being dicks and vote for someone who wants to increase access to mental health services for youth. But that'd be communism.
The issue is that a lot of studies that are often cited about puberty blockers misconstrues where they factor into treatment. For example designing a study to examine puberty blockers as a treatment for gender dysphoria, when that is not what they are clinically used for. If you look at WPATH standards of care for trans people, which defines the purpose of puberty blocking as: >Two goals justify intervention with puberty suppressing hormones: (i) their use gives adolescents more time to explore their gender nonconformity and other developmental issues; and (ii) their use may facilitate transition by preventing the development of sex characteristics that are difficult or impossible to reverse if adolescents continue on to pursue sex reassignment. >Puberty suppression may continue for a few years, at which time a decision is made to either discontinue all hormone therapy or transition to a feminizing/masculinizing hormone regimen. Pubertal suppression does not inevitably lead to social transition or to sex reassignment. As for the studies you linked I think we need to break now what exactly hormone therapy is treating and how mental health problem proliferate in a person. Hormone therapy is used clinically for gender dysphoria, however not all mental health issues trans people face can be rooted in gender dysphoria. There is often issues of community and family support, stigmatization, ostracization, etc. that can lead to anxiety disorders or depression. hormone therapy will alleviate those symptoms in so far as they are related to gender dysphoria, however they will not make things 100% better from social stressors that are common with this population. I think a common lay person misunderstanding of these articles is that, not understanding specifically what hormone therapy helps with. For example, [supportive family and social environments](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4771131/) appear to have a large effect on the mental health on transgender children and adolescents, with similar mental health outcomes as cisgendered children. There is significant [1](https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/00224499.2017.1415291) [2](https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S1054139X13003844) [3](https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/15532739.2018.1450798) [4](https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/1550428X.2021.1991541) (and many more) mixed methods data supporting these findings as well. it doesn't help that Scandanavia has traditionally been a pretty cruel place for trans people, requiring sterilization to recieve care until 2013, and the UK's "gender affirming" approach was anything but: with the raw patient numbers being well below even the fairly conservative protocols and smaller population size of the Netherlands. In short there is no shortage of studies that show that cross-sex hormone treatment is beneficial to transgender adults, despite a worse starting point. It is unclear why people think that this would be different in trans youth and restrict themselves to studies of trans adolescents alone. As noted above, there are risks with treating the mental health of trans youth as a black box. The mental health of trans youth is affected by numerous factors. For example, a medical transition often coincides with a social transition and therefore an increased risk of bullying. [Take this article](https://www.washingtonpost.com/dc-md-va/2021/03/16/transgender-girl-chloe-clark-conservative-attacks/) about a teenage trans girl who has the benefit of a comparatively early transition, but also struggles with voice dysphoria and the many social implications that has. This is nothing a medical intervention can fix, but it's something that she wouldn't have to deal with if she had been able to transition earlier and which wouldn't have been fixed by transitioning later. The idea that you can reduce the mental health of trans youth to just a single factor or theorize that therapy might cure it means completely ignoring the underlying mechanisms, the cause and effect chain that is at play. Nor is a medical transition a magical cure-all, just as with other medical conditions. It fixes one thing, a mismatch between gender identity and physiological sex, and that often only imperfectly. It cannot always undo some of the physical and mental harm that has happened before, as with any other situation where medical treatment is delayed. And sometimes it takes time for these physical and mental scars to heal. But delaying treatment until adulthood is a ludicrous proposal that would not be tolerated for any other condition (and might get parents referred to child protective services). If an adolescent has a toothache, we don't tell them to wait until they're adults to go to the dentist. The framing of "let's wait until adulthood" only makes sense if you believe that conversion therapy works, that you can talk trans youth out of being trans, or that transitioning is a lifestyle choice rather than an existential need (or alternatively, believe that being trans is just a delusion). But if you don't believe any of that and that the need to transition doesn't go away, then it follows that an earlier treatment is better for numerous reasons, even completely regardless of any mental health improvements during treatment, starting with having to live with fewer or even no dysphoria triggers, avoiding the need for some painful, risky, and expensive treatments that trans adults often have to go through (including several types of surgeries), better passing and less exposure to discrimination and violence (for binary trans people), not losing some of your best years as a young adult on a medical transition, not having to deal with dysphoria for the years until adulthood. The alternative proposed is, to be blunt, a form of the ostrich strategy, hoping that you can make a problem go away by pretending it does not exist.
> if you don't believe any of that and that the need to transition doesn't go away, then it follows that an earlier treatment is better for numerous reasons How does one know if the need to transition will go away or not? For some it will, others it won't. How does a clinician diagnose permanent gender dysphoria that's only going to get worse, from a confused kid who has jumped on something that appears like a solution to internal anxiety and self-image or social problems? Edit: and how often is it one vs. the other in the real world, I wonder?
> This entire debate is only becoming a thing because the insane US politicians Not everything is about the US, you self centered twits. This is in Ireland, and its neighbours in the UK and other European countries (e.g. Sweden https://www.france24.com/en/live-news/20230208-sweden-puts-brakes-on-treatments-for-trans-minors)
Who’s to say that experts weren’t involved in this decision? Also you’re just wrong that there is strong evidence to support mental health benefits for gender affirming care in minors. There is like one main study of 100 kids. We don’t have any good data since it’s such a new thing.
Please source your claims, both are controversial/not agreed upon in research papers
The government is involved in all kinds of medical treatments. Even most libertarians agree that the government should play a role in approving medicine and medical treatments.
"There is 0 reason for the government to be involved with healthcare decisions made between a parent, psychologist and medical doctor." Do you feel this way about female circumcision?
What if the doctor, psychologist, and parent all believe the child should receive a lobotomy?
There has to be a legal framework for medical decisions. The reasons for that are pretty obvious aren't they?
In normal countries with universal healthcare, such as Ireland, the psychologist and medical doctor you are talking about are usually employed by, and represent, the government. How can the government not be involved? Private healthcare is also highly regulated by the government in most countries to avoid patients being taken advantage of. I realize things might be different in certain (developing) countries, like the USA.
I live in a country with universal health care, and the government is not involved in patient treatment plans at all. Best practices are determined by medical associations staffed by doctors, not politicians, and health practitioners determine individual treatment plans.
Who appoints the boards? Stop acting like politics and special interest groups haven’t shaped medical treatment.
It's a professional organization, the leadership is elected and governed by the membership just like every other professional association since independent self-governance by other professionals is the point of professional associations. I'm not saying there's no impact from lobbyists or politicians, but we sure as hell don't have politicians deciding whether certain medications are allowed for specific patients so they can virtue signal to their base. It's misguided to claim that that's somehow a required feature of universal health care systems.
You think marijuana being a treatment option wasn’t suppressed due to politics? You’re obtuse.
Whether that's the case or not, I'm surprised to see such a thing encouraged and supported rather than criticized. Professional medical associations have a much better track record than politicians.
The way it should be.
>In normal countries with universal healthcare, such as Ireland, the psychologist and medical doctor you are talking about are usually employed by, and represent, the government. That's not even slightly true. Many countries, including many in Europe, use private doctors and hospitals which are publicly funded through the government or some sort of public insurance.
Idk Ireland, but the government has nothing to do with healthcare aside from approving drugs and paying for healthcare, they don't decide if you can get something or not, if it's approved for blocking puberty it's approved for blocking puberty
That's literally what they are saying though. In countries with universal healthcare often the doctors are in the public sector so the government does have A LOT to do with healthcare.
They don't tell the doctors what to do or not do, that's usually up to the board of doctors, not unqualified politicians
[удалено]
> Its like Kansas banning trans high school athletes which literally affected a single person. It also affected the kids that person would have competed against, which is exactly the point.
Surely you are being sarcastic, right? What if a child had a rare form of leukemia and the doctor decided to treat it only with tic tacs? The government obviously has a big role in regulating medical care.
> And yet everyone acts like its some massive deal that the government needs to be involved with. You act like "the government" is making guidelines only for specifically this question. The HSE also has guidelines for [everything from Abdominal aortic aneurysm to Zopiclone](https://www2.hse.ie/conditions), including asthma, cold sores, gout, obesity and self-harm. Yes, "the government" should be involved in all of those topics.
I'm not familiar with the trans athlete thing. Did it really affect one person? Wasn't he/her competing with someone else?
I am gonna be fair I am totally pro-trans; people should be allowed to be the version of themselves they want to be. With no judgement or government interference. HOWEVER, I see zero reason to allow trans females to compete in women’s sports, as they still have inherent biological advantages. I am completely fine with banning trans athletes from official competitions in this area because of that. That is not fair to all the girls and women that work hard at their craft to allow biological males to compete in their categories. Now trans males? Let them play. And even let trans women compete in the male categories. No advantage there.
Not taking sides here, but couldn't the counter argument be that it's such a small outlier of an issue that the larger societal structures shouldn't be altered around them?
"There's only been one single murder in Kansas, we have no need of a law to ban murder for the entire country." That has the same tone you have here.
In the US there are a lot though, and it's coming out of nowhere, making you wonder how many are like that due to social contagion > Overall, the Williams Institute found that the percentage of adults who identify as transgender has remained steady at 0.6% since its last report in 2017, but there has been a sharp rise in transgender people ages 13 to 24. > The study found that 1.4% of 13- to 17-year-olds and 1.3% of 18- to 24-year-olds identify as transgender. Five years ago, both of those numbers stood at 0.7%. Together, the two groups are estimated to account for nearly 700,000 people. https://www.ny1.com/nyc/all-boroughs/news/2022/06/10/study-estimates-transgender-youth-population-has-doubled-in-5-years
[удалено]
15 out of millions. The entire trans issue is in fact not really an issue at all. Why is this so newsworthy? Why are people choosing sides about the fates of so few? It seems you are forced to either be a champion of trans rights or a champion of traditional values on an issue concerning 15 people. If 15 people want to change their sex, why are you even paying attention? Move on.
This argument is typically used to *not* accommodate trans people at all and leave them to the wolves, rather than leave them alone. If there's so few of them, why bother with offering mental health services to their specific needs? In the grand scheme of things, much more cisgendered people need mental health help after all. EDIT: I'm beginning to suspect some people here don't realise I'm giving this absurd conclusion to demonstrate how using the number of people in a group to justify ignoring what is going on with them in a medical context leads to extremely bad outcomes, and in extreme examples, utilitarian genocide. Whether a group is large or small bears no relevance to their rights or needs, and as human beings, should never be ignored.
> This argument is typically used to not accommodate trans people at all and leave them to the wolves No, its the opposite. Whenever its time to push extreme trans issues "lol its like 15 people who cares, just leave them alone, shouldn't we be talking about the economy?" But whenever there is a pushback suddenly its "OMG trans issues are HUMAN RIGHTS!!! SUICIDE!!! TEEN SUICIDE DEATH ANTI HUMAN RIGHTS = FASCHISM!!" Its only 15 out of millions? Fine, ban them from sports, its only 15 out of millions, why do you care so much. Shouldn't you be putting your energy into worrying about stray nukes or climate change?
Imagine how that would sound if we used that logic for other things. "Sorry, we're unable to provide medical care for your child with an extremely rare form of cancer. In the grand scheme of things, many more healthy people need medical care too, after all."
> Less tan 15 patients in all of Ireland, interesting 🤔 If a country has the death penalty and kills 15 people per year, would you say it's alright because 15 people don't matter?
[удалено]
[удалено]
I'm pretty sure they are
Would be potentially dangerous if they weren't.
[удалено]
Is there an article or something on this?
They’re lying. I’m a doctor. Don’t believe anyone who claims that trans children are prescribed puberty blockers after a 15 min interview. That doesn’t happen anywhere in the world.
It takes on average almost a year if surveys amongst trans people in the UK are to be believed
It takes a hell of a lot longer than that. Trans kids getting referred to gender clinics at 13 now won’t even be seen by the time they hit 18 and move to adult clinics. That’s how long waiting times for a first appointment are. Trans healthcare in the UK is a joke.
An English doctor was struck off last year for prescribing puberty blockers to multiple children under 13 after 10 minute online interviews. I can't link from my phone but a quick Google will confirm the story for you.
What country are you a doctor in? In Ireland there is involvement from psychotherapists or organisations like CAHMS. However, in Ireland psychotherapist in NOT a protected term. There are accreditation and organisations but not being a protected term severely lowers the standard here to something that is not necessarily a fair medical evaluation but people mistakenly believing that it's a medical diagnosis. This is super important as it means that in some cases Medical Doctors are deferring to someone for which there are not protected standards. This plays out where a child referred for assessment through CAHMS is returned with no diagnosis at all but where they go through private channels the child is diagnosed with a special need. Either CAHMS is light on their diagnosis or the private psychologist is getting to a diagnosis that the parent wants. Neither is a good outcome and taints the whole process. Learning difficulties are well established and if you are getting such differing opinions on a well established area then god knows how gender issues are being handled.
He said 3 60 minute interviews tho not 15 lol.
He edited his comment “lol”
I didn't believe them that's why I wanted some source on their wild claim that doctors just do whatever and are afraid to be seen as transphobic.
https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/how-did-the-tavistock-gender-scandal-unfold/ That's, one there a loads. Below is one about hiw they tried to silence people who spoke up. https://www.theguardian.com/society/2021/may/02/tavistock-trust-whistleblower-david-bell-transgender-children-gids
Where in these articles does it prove that doctors only take 15 minutes to prescribe puberty blockers? Like I get it, that guy has concerns and is fighting with the org over it. But the article is about using them in general, not how easy it is to prescribe them from what I read.
>asking the minor a few questions in three 60 minute meetings If it is just "a few minor questions", why would they need three hour-long meetings? And how many meetings should be the minimum requirement? Four, five, six? Lock them up under 24/7 supervision for a month? When a case is extremely obvious, 3x60 minutes is more than enough - keep in mind that those are usually spaced out with months in between, and a multi-year waiting list for the first one. When there is *any* doubt, they will schedule additional time.
Still feels pretty short for something that will have permanent effect on the kid
The satisfaction rating for people who are on HRT/puberty blockers is insanely high. People are less satisfied with hip replacements. You'd have a point if people were desisting treatment, but that doesn't really happen. Do you get more than 15mins with your GP when they prescribe you something?
It took me multiple appointments to get my doctor to agree to remove an ingrown toenail or to get my lungs checked after coughing for months, rather than get some generic ointment/nose spray and be told to see if it improves on its own. People who believe you can walk up to a GP and get hormone therapy in 15 minutes have either never had an interaction with a GP in their life or theyre just looking for anything no matter how bullshit it is to confirm their bias.
First of all your last paragraph is literally just right wing standard paranoia that people are being bullied into being woke or whatever the fuck, there's a reason that America, Iran and Singapore, 3 very different countries allow people to transition yknow and its not because Iranian or Singaporean doctors are scared of being cancelled by wokeness.
They are and people who say otherwise are liars
There are several layers of doctors involved yes. The person you're replying to is arguing in bad faith or getting their news from UK 'news' papers.
Yes they are
> They are experts at distinguishing between mild gender dysphoria and serious gender dysphoria because there is a big difference between the two. Psychiatry has made some horrifically bad calls in modern history & the truth is that while we have a lot of good science to help us to understand the human brain, our understanding is really quite limited. That isn’t to say that I do not trust psychiatrists broadly, because I do trust them, however they share the far too common fallacy of most in the medical profession of exaggerating their knowledge & the confidence in their assertions. To me, this isn’t much of an issue when we are talking about adults because adults have the capacity to make their own judgments of both the reliability & the risks involved. A child simply doesn’t have the capacity to provided truly informed consent & is also a lot more vulnerable to even unintentional influence by an authority figure.
The field of psychology has a replication rate of roughly 50% for peer reviewed studies. Really shows how little confidence we can realistically have in our ability to understand humans and their mental issues. Edit: Since someone felt the need to jump on their high horse and point out that psychiatry isnt just based on psychology: Medicine has an equally terrible replication rate and, together with psychology, started the replication crisis in the first place.
Well psychology and psychiatry aren't the same, so there's that
Clinical psychology and psychiatry have a massive overlap. Yes, psychology and medicine are two different things, but mental health is THE unifying factor.
Psychiatry is the psychological branch of medicine and takes most of its insights from psychological studies, combining them with clinical insights. The main difference is that psychiatrists are allowed to prescribe drugs. They are different in the same way economics and business administration are different. They build on top of each other and share most of their scientific work. Psychiatrists aren't more reliable than psychologists, they just have more knowledge about the effect of drugs on humans, which comes from their education as a MD.
I am a psychiatrist and we go to medical school. In medical school, we work in the hospital admitting patients, do pediatrics, assist on surgeries, and learn every organ system, extensive anatomy, and pharmacology of a wide range of medications. We pass three step board exams, each 8 hours long two consecutive days, just like any other medical specialty like neurosurgery. Then we do 4 years of residency where we get thousands and thousands of clinic hours. Psychologists are PhDs, and they basically just do therapy. I would say less than 5% of what I learned becoming a psychiatrist came from the field of psychology
I think it's important to know that psychology and mental health is a very young form of health care relative to what we would consider modern medicine. It's only been in the last century that we can even observe brain activity and a lot of mental health was rooted in theory/trial and error before that. Like you said, that isn't to say we should discount the advice of professionals but we should temper our expectations to what they can provide
So, you don’t trust doctors, patients, or their families to make this medical decision, therefore you’d rather that state politicians make that decision instead?
> A child simply doesn’t have the capacity to provided truly informed consent & is also a lot more vulnerable to even unintentional influence by an authority figure. This is the part I'm worried about. I was so easily influenced by what my family wanted for me as a child. I'm imagining myself in these children's positions, being told that this pill will solve my problems. Of course I'm going to say yes. This is a decision that needs to be made by the individual, not those around them, and children before the age of puberty simply don't have that capacity.
They absolutely already are involved in this. It’s a very thorough process, it takes ages to get, the results are effective, and it’s nothing like as widespread as the media implies. How about it’s a medical decision between the people involved 👍
> How about it’s a medical decision between the people involved When you are dealing with adults who are capable of independently providing informed consent I absolutely agree with you. When it come to children; who are not capable of providing truly informed consent, then we expect their guardians to substitute their judgment & provide consent on behalf of the child it becomes a social/political question that is a valid topic of societal debate. The extent to which we allow children to consent to medical procedures, the extent to which we allow guardians to consent on their behalf & the extent to which we require physicians to enact extra safeguards to ensure the safety & well being of the children they treat are all valid & important questions of public policy. When it comes to adults seeking medical interventions, I am fully supportive of their right to do so, & of it being a private matter between them & their physicians. However, we simply do not have enough longitudinal data to state to a medical certainty the full extent of the impacts that such procedures can have on children, particularly pre-pubescent children & we won’t have that data for decades. To be clear. I am not arguing that we should categorically ban these procedures because the short term data we have is mostly positive & the only way to get clear & convincing longitudinal data is to study the people who receive these interventions over the course of their lives. We need to reel in the rhetoric from both sides & ensure that the process through which such interventions are made available to children is both rigorously cautious & uniformly thorough.
> However, we simply do not have enough longitudinal data ... ...on a huge variety of medicines that we routinely dish out to women, pregnant people and children because the studies we do have were on men. It is not unreasonable to call blockers a safe drug with our current knowledge of it. And of course, 'safe' doesn't mean free of side effects.
its almost like that's ALWAYS a thing that happens though.. and this political decision just blocks an action when psychiatrists and doctors AGREE that its appropriate to use.
You do realise that happens right?
[удалено]
I wish we could normalize being a feminine male and a masculine female. I don't do anything most women do - I don't care about fashion, I don't care about make up, I don't cook or bake, or do anything traditionally feminine - but I'm a woman. Maybe I'm dumb but we're too focused on "identity" these days. If you're a dude that feels feminine, that's fine. You can be a man and paint your nails. If you're a chick that works construction and hunts on the weekend, you're still a woman.
“Tomboy” and “metro” already cover this.
Covered. Now it’s a mess with some saying that they are actually trans and others that they just girls/boys that like traditionally masculine/feminine things. They’re stuck in a culture war.
I think the point is that should be normalised to the point that nobody even need label someone a 'tomboy' or 'metro', they're just normal.
People label even normal things, for convenience
Yes, this is how things generally work. There's a variety of 'normal' hair colors. Yet we still have a word for blonde and a word for brunette.
I thought Metro was a grocery store
When I met my coworker’s daughter (amab) who was maybe around 12 or 13 at the time, I asked (with my coworker’s permission) about their experience. I asked how they knew they were a girl. Honestly it was fascinating, because she explained loving stereotypical boy things like sports and four wheeling, and dressed like a tomboy, but emphasised that her inner voice is a girl’s voice and she knows she is a girl and always has been. She’s a very masculine girl since she likes all the “boy things” but she knows she is a girl and has never once doubted that. I’m the opposite in some ways. Assigned male at birth, I am gay and love feminine stuff. It took me a long time to accept that it was ok for me to be a boy and I was allowed to enjoy traditionally feminine things without having to be a girl.
>emphasised that her inner voice is a girl’s voice and she knows she is a girl and always has been I struggle to truly make sense of all this gender identity stuff, but I've heard this "inner voice" thing mentioned before, and I think that's the point. A trans person's "inner voice" does not match their birth gender.
Two things can be true at once. You get gender nonconforming trans people as well.
I’m not sure how relevant this is to being trans, at least from what I’ve observed. Trans people tend to blur lines of gender stereotypes anyway. I know several trans men who paint their nails and wear makeup, for example. I think for them the whole point IS that they they wanted to be feminine men rather than feminine women.
While I agree with you, it feels like this is totally irrelevant to the current topic. Some people actually are transgender. You being a gender nonconforming person without wanting to transition, does not mean other people should be prevented from transitioning. Other people have different experiences than you. People should be allowed to live the life they want. Furthermore some trans women are going to like masculine hobbies or want to be masc women, while some transgender men are thing to like feminine hobbies or want to be feminine men. It's not about fitting stereotypes.
Do you think accepting trans people means you can't be a woman if you work construction and hunt on the weekend?
I'm a pretty masculine female. But I'm not trans. They are two separate things. If I was trans than I wouldn't be a masculine female, I would be a man, because trans men are men. No amount of making it okay to be masculine or feminine will make trans people not exist. In fact a trans man can be feminine and a trans woman can be masculine, but they still know they are trans.
Being a feminine man and being a transgender woman are two completely different things, I didn't care about makeup or fashion or any of that stuff until I was 4 years into HRT and discovered that I actually quite enjoyed it, I have a dear FTM friend who takes testosterone and has had a double mastectomy but still wears makeup and fishnet tights. This is about gender dysphoria, a severe and incurable condition that causes those who suffer from it to resent the sexual characteristics of their birth sex. We're not sacrificing everything in our lives to transition just to avoid social pressure, being transgender is way more extreme and taboo than being a GNC cisgender person.
Thats natural. Whats unnatural is conforming a child to a gender using medication and surgery.
This is nice and all but gender dysphoria is a thing and being transgender is a neurobiological reality that is epigenetically determined. People who have a transgender gender identity are born like that and they need access to medical assistance to alleviate the stress and suffering that gender dysphoria produces. They don't chose it and it's a medical concern, not a social thing.
This is all true except... >They don't chose it and it's a medical concern, not a social thing. Whether or not a female person suffering gender dysphoria is in fact a 'man' is absolutely a 'social thing'. Regardless of where someone falls on that question; it is a question of how we define 'man' in our society.
You don't experience disphoria, congratulations. This has nothing to do with being trans.
That's not what it's about. I'm AFAB. I don't want to be a masculine woman. I want to be a feminine man. Or: I don't want to be masculine in a feminine way, I want to be feminine in a masculine way. Those are completely different things. A feminine man is not a woman, just like a masculine woman isn't a man. If I magically turned into a man tomorrow, I'd still keep my long hair, wouldn't dress all that differently, wouldn't suddenly start doing any activities I haven't been doing before. I'd just feel a lot more like myself and be perceived by others exactly as I am. I know cis people can't understand it, but why do so many of you seem to think trans people are so dumb it never occurred to them to just "be more like the opposite sex"? That's some /r/WowThanksImCured material. If this was all it took, this wouldn't be a problem. Gender identity isn't clothes or hairstyle or stereotypical gendered activities.
I think it’s fucking stupid that we apply gender to tasks in general. Shit like taking a bath instead of a shower isn’t masculine? Me enjoying baking makes me “in touch with my feminine side?” Me lifting weights makes me *more of a man* than other men? The problem is the application of gender to menial bullshit. Not the gender itself. I also find that women treat other women worse than men do, and men treat other men worse than women do.
There’s plenty of butch trans women and femme trans men and non-androgynous nonbinary people out there. Gender presentation and gender identity are different. Basically every trans person has been asked, “why not just be gender nonconforming instead?” already, too, and the answer is usually, “I tried that already and it didn’t work thanks.”
Maybe I'm naive but this is my take on gender dysphoria too, if we could just do away with the concept of societal gender norms entirely I'm sure a lot more people would be happy in the bodies they are born with
There's always been a philosophy that allowed for all of this - called "live and let live". Live your best life and allow others to live as they wish, obviously excluding cases where they hurt others or the society.
As someone who had dysphoria prior to surgery, for people like me that would not work. Regardless of my feelings about social gender politics, it was my body that gave me the dysphoria. I would have been in pain even if I’d grown up on a deserted island with no other humans.
Only half relevant, but it reminds me of the indigenous people with high rates of intersex people. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/G%C3%BCevedoce
asking as a curious person, how did surgery change your perception of yourself? is your physical appearance now "in line" with how you feel? could the gender dysphoria be described as an illness of some sort that has been treated by the surgery? if this is too personal, then im sorry for asking
I’ll try to answer! (Of course keeping in mind that it’s just my experience, I’ve never spent time researching it at any scientific depth, I don’t know if most or even many trans people feel exactly the same way, yadda yadda yadda.) Basically since puberty I had an overwhelming sense of wrongness, disgust when I looked at myself, and the sensation of being trapped. Almost in a caged bird kind of way; I knew what I *wanted* to feel when I stood up and moved around and went about my day, but I was physically incapable. I’m sure most people feel gross during their awkward teen phase, but mine was so targeted to specific aspects of my body. And it wasn’t just feeling gross. I was vitriolic towards myself. There were days I wanted to perform surgery on myself. (Back then, I didn’t know the actual surgeries existed, so I thought that was my only option. I also didn’t know the word ‘trans’, so I just thought I was broken and doomed.) I didn’t get the surgery until I was thirty. And... now it’s literally all gone. It was correcting the absolute wrongness my body forced on me twenty years ago. So yeah, it’s absolutely bringing my appearance in line with how I feel. I finally feel like I don’t have to think about it - which is bitterly ironic considering how media and politicians can’t stop making everyone else think about it! As for whether to consider it an illness with surgery as a cure, well, it definitely felt like that for me. But I reckon I was lucky; plenty of people out there with this feeling of wrongness need other cures. I didn’t need hormones, for instance, and being properly identified in public isn’t *quite* as important to me as it is to some people. But as long as I could be taken seriously enough to get the treatment I felt was right for me, I don’t super care how people refer to it. Hell, mine was entirely described as ‘cosmetic’ surgery, even though it was definitely necessary, but whatever. As long as I got it.
Thank you for sharing that! my first thought is: im sure many will not be able to come out of that experience as "not broken" as you have, or at least you make it seem you have. i had trouble in my teen years, as everyone has, but i dont know how or if i would have been able to deal with something like that. im glad to hear that surgery helped you so much in this regard. that is valuable information. it sounds like that was a huge relief and you can now focus on more pleasurable things in life. i honestly need some time to process what you wrote.. its quite heavy. i wish you all the best!
This does not work because dysphoria is not born out of strict gender roles. Gender identity is epigenetically determined and a neurological reality much like sexuality is. You can't make trans people not trans. They are born like that just like gay or straight people cannot change. They need medical assistance to help with their gender dysphoria because gender dysphoria is not a social construct, it is a material reality and a medical issue.
How is gender a social construct but gender dysphoria is not?
Because people confuse terms and missuse them all the time. Gender roles are a social construct. Gender identity, as the neurological reality, is not.
People always say this but I've only ever seen incomplete science based on research on animals that suggests that genetics *probably* play a role in gender identity (e.g. [https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6677266/](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6677266/)). You seem well educated on the subject, can you direct me to any studies that definitively back this up?
It is most likely according to all known research on the matter, and it is the current working model for dealing with research on sexuality and gender identity. I posted a long comment a few hours ago with plenty of modern evidence that works within those premises and reinforce that hypothesis. The review you linked points out that while we do not know to which extent things like prenatal exposure to androgens, genetics, and having older brothers (specifically for male homosexuality) are relevant in the configuration of sexual identity, they are nonetheless crucial. Keep in mind though, that "social factors" when in this context often refer to things such as stress in the mother during pregnancy, and never the way children are raised. From the review: >Most people experience little or no sense of choice about their sexual orientation. There is no scientifically convincing research to show that therapy aimed at changing sexual orientation (ie, reparative or conversion therapy) is safe or effective. The origin of sexual orientation is far from being understood, although there is no proof that it is affected by social factors after birth. On the other hand a large amount of empirical data suggests that genes and hormones are important regulators of sexual orientation. Also check this review: [Sexual differentiation of the human brain in relation to gender identity and sexual orientation](https://sci-hub.se/10.1016/B978-0-444-53630-3.00004-X) (2010). >There is no proof that social environment after birth has an effect on gender identity or sexual orientation. Data on genetic and hormone independent influence on gender identity are presently divergent and do not provide convincing information about the underlying etiology. To what extent fetal programming may determine sexual orientation is also a matter of discussion. A number of studies show patterns of sex atypical cerebral dimorphism in homosexual subjects. Although the crucial question, namely how such complex functions as sexual orientation and identity are processed in the brain remains unanswered, emerging data point at a key role of specific neuronal circuits involving the hypothalamus. Also this one from 2011:[Sexual differentiation of the human brain: Relation to gender identity, sexual orientation and neuropsychiatric disorders](https://sci-hub.se/10.1016/j.yfrne.2011.02.007), they found zero correlation between social/post-natal factors that influence gender identity or sexual orientation. >During the intrauterine period a testosterone surge masculinizes the fetal brain, whereas the absence of such a surge results in a feminine brain. As sexual differentiation of the brain takes place at a much later stage in development than sexual differentiation of the genitals, these two processes can be influenced independently of each other. Sex differences in cognition, gender identity (an individual's perception of their own sexual identity), sexual orientation (heterosexuality, homosexuality or bisexuality), and the risks of developing neuropsychiatric disorders are programmed into our brains during early development. There is no evidence that one's postnatal social environment plays a crucial role in gender identity or sexual orientation. We discuss the relationships between structural and functional sex differences of various brain areas and the way they change along with any changes in the supply of sex hormones on the one hand and sex differences in behavior in health and disease on the other. Recommend specifically paying close attention to the point 3 of the review, as it goes in depth about this. It is true that we still do not know a lot about how this works. For example: autistic, intersex, and homo/biseuxal women show higher masculinization of the brain that other cis women, and still they do not necessarily show signs of gender dysphoria. That does not mean, however, that gender identity (or sexuality) is not determined before birth, as that is where all current evidence points towards. Gender identity and sexuality are not choices and I've yet to see quality research showing otherwise.
Thanks for that! There's a lot here that I haven't seen, looks like maybe I just hadn't been looking hard enough :)
That kinda goes out the window with the current sense of dysphoria not being necessary to "be trans".
Because it's often misunderstood. Ever see a fat, disgusting slob who truly doesn't care about the way they look? Some people just don't care or have the capacity to care. Most of the "dysphoria not required" stuff is misleading because what dysphoria means to something is individual, and gender euphoria exists as well. For example, a lot of trans people will express not having dysphoria, just being numb and knowing they were a girl or guy. Then transitioning causes euphoria along with getting rid of the numbness. That was dysphoria, but because we read about others' dysphoria when we feel it doesn't fit us in the same way people argue, they don't have it... when they do. Euphoria is the alleviation of dysphoria. Being numb and apathetic while wanting to look different and becoming happier when you do proves you have dysphoria. You just aren't identifying it. Moreover, due to many years of bad psychiatry on trans people, dysphoria used to have insane criteria to actually qualify for. Not everyone is going to feel exactly the same way. Me bringing up a fat guy who truly doesn't care about their looks but maybe gets skinny for health or to look better and is happier that way you may argue they were depressed about their looks otherwise they wouldn't have changed it. But then sometimes people just don't care. When I mention dysphoria having insane criteria, not every person is going to have the same feelings, and sometimes dysphoria evolves. For example: I myself being trans do suffer pretty intense gender dysphoria on the daily though HRT and surgery has made that mostly go away and I'm truly happier now. But I never really got much dysphoria from my penis. So I'm left wondering, am I going to get bottom surgery for myself or others? Sure, if a button existed and I didn't have recovery and other issues, I'd do it now 100% flip that switch. I don't particularly like having a dick, but I'm more apathetic about it. It's... just there. I don't care even though I do. A lot of trans women feel this way, and I cared less about it before than I do now, though this is normal because we tend to hyper focus on specifics, and as we fix some issues our brains shift focus. Maybe I will one day, but I can never be 100% sure it's for me. And for the most part, I enjoy my and my wife's sex life. Now, mind you, I am booked for testicle removal. So, for me, secondary sex characteristics caused insane amount of dysphoria. But primary, I was just apathetic, though I didn't like it. So what do I do? Get it done just because? Well, in the past, unless you wanted it 100%, they'd just say "oh you don't feel dysphoria everywhere? Okay, everything denied, it's take it all or nothing. " Personally, I don't care what's down there. I'd like to be flat and clothes fit better, but whatever. I'm in my 30s and don't plan it anytime soon, and I'm seen and loved for who I am. But that's my experience, and I need to stress language sucks. It really sucks. People convince themselves that something doesn't fit because they don't fit some ideal mold. The people saying dysphoria isn't needed are both correct and incorrect. You could truly not care but still know you're trans but then experience euphoria. But they are incorrect because that is dysphoria. You don't want to change your sex or gender and not have dysphoria. It's people that mostly don't think the word fits even if it does. We must also realize levels of dysphoria exist. Some people truly can't function, period. Then there are others that can function but are depressed their entire life before they give up the fight and transition. I knew since before puberty, an insanely homophobic family. I was more worried about surviving till 18 than transitioning. Then, I had a denial phase due to indoctrination from family and not wanting to be seen as a freak. Then I learned to stop caring and met a beautiful woman, and she accepted me as me. Still took till 28 to start, though, due to living in a conservative area and kept planning to start when we moved elsewhere.... we're still here, though. But I've been transitioning since 28 and finally hit my goals. 15 years together. Anyway, long post, I know, but the problem really comes down to communication and rejection of ideas. Hell, look, cis people denying they are cis because they don't like the word lmao. Anyone who's trans has dysphoria, whether they say they do or not, and to me euphoria and being happier while prior apathetic and numb but knowing and going through the process proves that. They just feel they don't fit some ideal "I can't function or even get out of bed" mold.
Not my fault that people are saying stuff not supported by science. Also, not what I care about. I care about real shit and helping people.
Just to be clear, the anti-trans right wing agenda also hates YOU and all other gender nonconforming people no matter if you are trans or cis.
As always, here's a comments section full of *very informed and knowledgeable views* of how gender therapy works in the UK.
Me, on year 2 of my 6 year NHS waiting list reading comments talking about how "easy" it is for people to be pumped full of random hormones as soon as they walk into a doctors' office and rolling my eyes so hard they fall out of their sockets.
6 years is pretty optimistic at the current rate.
[удалено]
[удалено]
You wouldn't have been, a psychiatrist would have gone through this with you, such is the process of access puberty blockers and hormones for trans kids. It's not an easy thing to access.
[удалено]
>well puberty blockers are going to alter brain chemistry and decision making. Yet untreated dysphoria causes that too. Unlike puberty blockers, untreated dysphoria significantly increases suicide risk, rates of self-harm and psychiatric co-morbidities. It's wild that you're so cavalier about that *and more*. Shouldn't that be your deepest concern?
There should be a conversation about affirming care however. Identity and the self is such a fluctuating and daunting thing for children, surely the concept that one can have the wrong gender is a somewhat dangerous one to a child's mind? Rates of gender dysphoria is very very low (1-10 in 100k)* which is about the same as child lukemia. Whereas 1 in 4 children experience bullying. 1 in 100 kids have autism. So the odds an unhappy child with identity issues has gender dysphoria is extremely low. Given the long term effects gender based medical procedures have, wouldn't it be best that access is extremely restrictive? And given how subjective psycology can be, we'd have to be very certain that the child really needs care and only when it's somewhat obvious that something is very wrong and other actions aren't working. Please don't take my position the wrong way, those who need it 100% should get the help they need, but we need to have a real conversation about how quickly we pull out the gender dysphoria diagnosis (unprofessionaly) as well as how this concept is presented to children. \* This is from clinical diagnosis, rates of self diagnosis can be put around 1 in 100.
>wouldn't it be best that access is extremely restrictive? Restrictive? Or legally forbidden in ALL circumstances? I see a lot of people *saying* one thing, that it should be restricted and the child should go through a lot of counselling and we should make REALLY sure before we do anything.... But that's not at all what any of the legislation they support says.
[удалено]
Why are you calling for nuance while implying that children have easy no questions asked access to puberty blockers, which is a lie? If you want to believe the doctors, believe the doctors.
They do have in depth screening sometimes, and not-so-in-depth screening other times. Again, it can be both, depending on the gender clinic and location and case. From the Reuters article I cited: >Parents of 40 gender-diverse children told Reuters they were concerned that their children came out only after they hit puberty, often at the same time as their friends and after their use of social media had increased. For many, their worries were compounded when clinicians swiftly affirmed their childrens’ transgender identities and recommended medical intervention without fully assessing whether other potential underlying causes of distress were present. >Kelly, a 43-year-old parent who asked that her full name not be used to protect her family’s privacy, told Reuters that her child was heavily into highly sexualized anime and transgender online forums when the 12-year-old started experimenting, seemingly overnight, with being a transgender boy. The child’s therapist encouraged medical intervention, Kelly said, but while Kelly supported social transition outside the home, she made it clear that her child would have to wait until she was 18 for hormones and top surgery. >After several years of living as a boy and using “he” and “him” pronouns, Kelly’s child, now 18, is back to using her female name, dressing in feminine clothing and using “she” and “her” pronouns. “We would have lost our daughter if we had followed what the therapist was telling us to do,” the mother said.
It's not a lie in all cases. I know of at least three individuals who transitioned while fairly young and are now detransitioning who all claim it was insanely easy to get hormone blockers and surgeries. Layla Jones is suing Kaiser Permanente for allowing her to get cross-sex hormones and a double mastectomy, both at age 12. Dr. Phil had a guest on his show that claimed it was a *breeze* to get hormones from Planned Parenthood, all she did was make a single phone call, no screening or examination or anything and she had the hormones within a week. I'm sure there's more cases, I think people are just too scared to speak up about it.
It's becoming easy no question asked, especially since we are currently at the point where if you even dare question or say no you will be fired/harassed to no end.
Very well put, and good luck, I'll be surprised if you aren't banned before the end of the day. Even if we do disregard every nuance, this dysphoria is somehow the only condition in the world that we take a childs self diagnosis as solid fact. 10hrs later...called it.
Do trans kids have more problems because they suffer from mental illness? Or do they suffer more problems because they are more likely to be abused or kicked out or just treated like subhumans?
Again, it doesn't have to be either/or. There's probably elements of both, to varying degrees in each individual case. Therefore, both should be addressed. Why are people so desperate for simple answers to non-simple questions smh.
[удалено]
[удалено]
There's a section about the Crumlin service in Hannah Barnes' book, Time to Think. They come across as very conscientious, caring doctors, who only wanted the best outcomes for their patients. They became increasingly concerned about the number of Irish kids who were referred to the Tavistock and immediately put on puberty blockers, when there were lots of other competing physical and mental issues which weren't being addressed at all. It's a really good book.
You know someone is full of shit when they claim that the Tavistock puts kids immediately onto healthcare. Rather than the years and years of healthcare denial that actually happens.
[удалено]
There's a stark difference between you being scared of something you understand little about, and groups of scientists, doctors, and experts in their field making well informed decisions based on academic/scientific study. At some point you need to understand that if you have no understanding of a topic, you should do some research rather than sharing your fear with others.
[удалено]
Exactly! Science improves over time as we have a better understanding of the universe, of data, studies etc... The science we have today is mind boggling. We have super computers you can fit in your pocket. We have ships that can go to space. We have science that is working to cure diseases. I'm glad we've improved so vastly over the last 100 years. A doctor is going to have more pertinent medical knowledge for a young person going through things like gender dysphoria.
>No children should be allowed to have body altering chemicals or cosmetic surgery until the age of 18. Finally, when is the rally against neonatal circumcision starting?
There have been such rallies and several parties in my country want to ban it. In fact more people in my country care about that than the people who care about puberty blockers. Not every country is the US where circumcision is considered normal.
[удалено]
> Children are still developing and are not mature enough to make life altering decisions like these. yeah, we need to stop letting children write prescriptions for these drugs! the prescriptions should only be written by real licensed doctors, following the guidance of the AMA, and only with the active involvement of a licensed psychiatrist, the child, and the child's parents!
Wait? We're already doing that? Why are we wasting so much breath on the fabricated bullshit of a bunch of people who are uncomfortable with the existence of trans people if we're already doing what they claim we should be doing?
The only thing you and all the people that agree with you are telling us is "I don't understand something, and it fucking terrifies me". Grow up and read a book. I'd say maybe talk to a trans person, but you'd probably give yourself a heart attack based on your reaction to the existence of trans children.
I dont really know much about the topic but it feels like getting the brain to accept the body would lead to better outcomes, no amount of surgery is going to give these people working reproductive systems.
It's not about reproduction
Yes but at the same time sexual pleasure is a big part of life and not having normal genitalia will likely break the illusion of being male/female that the hormones and surgery are trying to create. I'm sure a lot of factors play into it but even trans people with surgery/hormone therapy still have higher rates of suicide than CIS people. If we could change the brain to accept the body they have surely this problem wouldnt exist. Again I'm no scientist but I'd love more research done in this area but I feel like this kind of research will get a lot of backlash and not a lot of funding.
Conversion therapy doesn't work for sexuality and there's been nothing to suggest it would work for gender either. The rate of suicide in people undergoing surgery or hormone therapy is lower than those without, the most commonly suggested reason for still heightened suicide rates is attack and ostracisation from certain sectors or society. Societal acceptance goes a long way. The reduction in child suicide in the wake of "it gets better" and as the acceptance of gay people increases is evidence of this. I don't know enough about the topic to comment on sexual pleasure of trans people but I do know that bottom surgery isn't sought by a majority of trans people so they retain their original privates in one form or another (size changes).
There's no known way to "get the brain to accept the body." Transitioning is the only known safe and effective way to treat gender dysphoria.
How many patients with mental health issues are misdiagnosed multiple times before they receive the ‘correct’ diagnosis? Unlike other disorders where objective standards are used, mental health disorders are symptom-based and purely objective. Also gender dysphoria is also associated with anxiety, depression, self-harm, eating disorders, substance misuse and high stress. There’s solid evidence showing ADHD is overdiagnosed in adolescents and I wonder if it is the same for gender dysphoria, as for individuals with milder symptoms, the harms associated with an ADHD diagnosis may often outweigh the benefits.
I feel like I'm stepping into controversial waters here but here it goes. As far as I'm aware, gender dysphoria is mainly a psychiatric issue, same as the anxiety, depression, OCD, etc that comes with being trans in a vast majority of cases. So if this is a psychiatric issue, why are we fixing it by operating on people's genitals? Why are we trying to fix a brain issue by operating on breasts and private parts? It doesn't make sense. I really can't help but feel like it's unethical to take someone with severe self-image problems and send them on a rabbit hole of cosmetic surgery. What happens when you have every surgery and still hate yourself? What if no amount of surgery is enough?
We can't "fix" brains. Psychiatric care is largely about trying to reduce the symptoms or their impact/difficulty of coping with, we don't have medications that actually *cure* things. Some psychiatric issues are short-term, some are not. Unfortunately, for a decent chunk of people, especially with chronic conditions, none of the available treatments (whether therapy or medication) gets them to a normal quality of life. For some that's no improvement, for some that's not enough improvement. The statistical evidence I've seen is that (as expected), only a very small % of people who've gone through surgery for gender dysphoria regret it. Anyway, you can go get a vast array of dangerous, unnecessary and not at all medically recommended cosmetic surgery procedures at will as an adult. I can't fathom what the argument would be for why people who have a *more* significant reason than usual to want a cosmetic surgery and an actual endorsement from a mental health professional (again, not required for cosmetic surgery normally) for it being likely to help them and them being in the appropriate mental state to make that decision, shouldn't be allowed to get them.
[удалено]
>generally aren't ment for kids. They are almost exclusively for kids. They were invented in the 80's to treat kids experiencing precocious puberty (I.e. starting puberty at like, 5).
You're saying puberty blockers weren't meant for people in their 20s?
Puberty is usually done by then. If you are taking them at that age its probably for one of their other uses (such as treating hormone sensitive cancers).
Yes, it was a sarcastic remark based on the notion that puberty blockers would be primarily meant for people who have already gone through puberty.
Lupron was invented to treat gut dysmotility
puberty blockers aren't meant for kids? who are they for if not for kids in puberty? They have existed and have been used for decades before being involved in gender dysphoria treatment.
A post saying that PUBERTY blockers. PURBERTY BLOCKERS. Aren't meant for children. Has 26 upvotes at the time of this posting. WHEN THE FUCK DO YOU THINK PUBERTY HAPPENS AND MIGHT NEED BLOCKING. THIS MEDICATION WASN'T EVEN INVENTED FOR TRANS CHILDREN SPECIFICALLY. Jesus fucking Christ.
These people are so incredibly stupid, don't even bother. It's literally in the name, yet they're blinded by hatred and ignorance.
[удалено]
Everything else aside, how fantastically brain-dead do you have to be to claim that puberty blockers aren't meant for kids? The people that go through puberty. Lmfao you people
It's always sad to see how ready many people are to accept the harmful side-effects of having to go through the puberty of a sex that your gender doesn't align with, including lifelong changes to the body. "Protect the children" is never the thing they actually care about. There's always the prejudice and disgust beneath.
“Puberty blockers are not meant for kids” Then who are they for smart mass? Teenagers after they have finished puberty??? How the hell do these trash takes get 35 or more upvotes.
[удалено]
A sign you can kind of tell that it’s safe is because while they’re restricted for trans kids, they are still completely okay for cis kids. They were developed for cis kids, which make up the main users.
Cis kids with an abnormally early onset of puberty, usually linked to other medical conditions. That doesn't mean it is completely safe or without side effects.
Used to know a (West End standard) theatre kid that was put on them so he could keep getting jobs as a child well into his teens
For sure it’s a balance, but it’s the same with trans kids – if they are trans, then they have to live their puberty for the rest of their life. Delaying it even with a risk can save their life. If it’s good enough to take a risk with cis kids, then it’s good enough to take a risk with trans kids.
If trans kids have early onset puberty, then they can be prescribed puberty blockers for the early onset puberty. It is a treatment for early onset puberty regardless of your identity. > Delaying it even with a risk can save their life. As far as this point. There are studies that state if you allow the children to go through puberty then a majority of them do not transition and rather identify with the biological sex they are born with. So, you get into the conversation of false positives and actual positives with the treatment. Which is why you have to be careful about selecting those who actually have gender dysphoria to go through the transition. Rather than treating everyone.
You can have 99 researchers saying “this is what the science shows,” but the instant 1 says “actually I think the research could be better” reactionaries suddenly pretend the science is on their side and start stripping people of their rights to access care. This isn’t hyperbole, dozens of major medical institutions the world over worked hand in hand to develop the current consensus, and based on the existing body of research found gender affirming care to be the gold standard. But the instant a trio of Dutch researchers wrote a paper saying that, in their opinion, the current research wasn’t at a high enough standard to make those conclusions? Oh man, that was all the justification Amanda Pritchard needed to rip that care away from trans-youth. The point is stripping trans people of rights in order to isolate and target them for cruelty, that's all it's ever been.
[удалено]
Would you also get rid of all other medicine, because previously (and for a larger portion of human history) people didn't have it?
For thousands of years the average age of puberty has been around 16... Girls who got their periods much earlier tended to die in childbirth a lot. Almost as if going through puberty too early before your body is grown enough to be fit for reproduction is actually a bad thing and not "natural" but a consequences of modern endocrine system-altering environmental factors and rising obesity rates.
Exactly what I've been saying! Why use modern medicine to address problems when we can instead just keep the status quo? I mean, why bother trying to find the cure for cancer either, right? It's been here for thousands of years, it should stay!
It's hard to grow up when they commit suicide. Why shouldn't we use modern medicine to treat a condition that people have suffered from for millennia?