Transgender Thread.

[Danoff]

I take it then as you're not willing to discuss such "findings" here because they do not exist with credible sources.

Just lift a finger and actually engage with something you purport to be interested in. The highlights were literally laid out in short form for you just a few posts ago. It's absurd that you're taking this position.

Plenty of treatments already available for body dysphoria and the like. GAC surgery is expensive and irreversible. Some people argue it is "playing god". Not sure how many of you are religious but there's that. Why use it when other treatments exist.

Good question for a doctor or psychologist. But there are plenty of times when that question can be answered. To ban this you need to always be able to answer that it's never needed.

Danoff brought it up, weird point when he ran out of ideas to use as a rebuttal, yes. As I stated earlier, you can't find a reliable statistic on that. It's a poor point.

It wasn't weird, it was an attempt to find common ground. I discovered that you were unwilling to bend on this weird rule you have about GAC even to save the life of a child, which is heartless if you ask me.

 

[wheelhp]

It wasn't weird, it was an attempt to find common ground. I discovered that you were unwilling to bend on this weird rule you have about GAC even to save the life of a child, which is heartless if you ask me.

Show me actual children in that position, between suicide and GAC surgery. It does not exist. There's no statistic for it. You've made it up. Unless you come up with the statistics, there's no reason to believe your premise.

 

[Daniel]

Show me actual children in that position, between suicide and GAC surgery. It does not exist. There's no statistic for it. You've made it up. Unless you come up with the statistics, there's no reason to believe your premise.

Studies have shown that gender-affirming care can provide 73% lower odds of suicidality. I don't think it's a far-fetched hypothetical to imagine that someone might sadly end their life if they don't get the gender-affirming care that they need.

Gender-affirming care -- even non-permanent care such as puberty blockers -- can help reduce the risk of suicide and depression in those who receive it.

Also keep in mind that when I say GAC here, it's highly unlikely to be any form of surgery -- only in very rare exceptions does it happen.

 

[wheelhp]

Studies have shown that gender-affirming care can provide 73% lower odds of suicidality. I don't think it's a far-fetched hypothetical to imagine that someone might sadly end their life if they don't get the gender-affirming care that they need.

If you lock a child in a padded cell, it's pretty difficult for them to suicide. These padded cells were used for many types of people for many issues... I say child. Adults might be more creative. But danoff brought up suicidal children, so Child+Padded cell seems to work.

Gender-affirming care -- even non-permanent care such as puberty blockers -- can help reduce the risk of suicide and depression in those who receive it.

Also keep in mind that when I say GAC here, it's highly unlikely to be any form of surgery -- only in very rare exceptions does it happen.

I still prefer a ban on the GAC surgeries, but that's just me. But I just came across something else;

Body Integrity Disorder, In which the individual believes a body part "does not belong to them" or should be amputated. Therapy and pharmaceutical intervention were so ineffective that people with BID would find other, non-medical ways to remove or amputate their limbs, often leading to complications, sepsis, and death.

These things can happen, how far must trans movements and GAC go before people's limbs get chopped off in the name of Body dysphoria and gender identity? Is it only then something to be alarmed about? Legalizing and funding this crap only makes it more likely to see more people without more limbs. Must admit I'm not yet a fan of the idea. Maybe it'll grow on me. Mutilation has no end. Give people the tools, they'll do more of it. It's like getting a tattoo, gotta try everything once it's out there.

 

[HenrySwanson]

If you lock a child in a padded cell, it's pretty difficult for them to suicide. These padded cells were used for many types of people for many issues... I say child. Adults might be more creative. But danoff brought up suicidal children, so Child+Padded cell seems to work.

I still prefer a ban on the GAC surgeries, but that's just me. But I just came across something else;

Body Integrity Disorder, In which the individual believes a body part "does not belong to them" or should be amputated. Therapy and pharmaceutical intervention were so ineffective that people with BID would find other, non-medical ways to remove or amputate their limbs, often leading to complications, sepsis, and death.

These things can happen, how far must trans movements and GAC go before people's limbs get chopped off in the name of Body dysphoria and gender identity? Is it only then something to be alarmed about? Legalizing and funding this crap only makes it more likely to see more people without more limbs. Must admit I'm not yet a fan of the idea. Maybe it'll grow on me. Mutilation has no end. Give people the tools, they'll do more of it. It's like getting a tattoo, gotta try everything once it's out there.

I'm struggling to understand your point here.

You're suggesting that those at extreme risk of suicide due to gender dysphoria should be admitted to a psychiatric ward and kept in a seclusion room and denied GAC....? Is that all components of GAC or just surgery?

Also, I'm not sure what you're trying to articulate by bringing up BID??

 

[Danoff]

Show me actual children in that position, between suicide and GAC surgery. It does not exist. There's no statistic for it. You've made it up. Unless you come up with the statistics, there's no reason to believe your premise.

@Daniel already handled this as I would have.

If you lock a child in a padded cell, it's pretty difficult for them to suicide. These padded cells were used for many types of people for many issues... I say child. Adults might be more creative. But danoff brought up suicidal children, so Child+Padded cell seems to work.

A padded cell doesn't solve anything. It simply postpones (and exaggerates) the issue until you either presumably let them out or they go insane. Are you saying you'd rather let a child rot in a padded cell until they lose their mind (under state funding) than to let them pay to modify their genitals?

Perhaps you're thinking they get locked in a padded cell until they're 18 after which we let them out an they can do what they like. What is the point? Now you have an undereducated compromised adult who is presumably still of the same mindset they were when they went in, who gets the surgery they needed, and has simply been incarcerated like a criminal in the interim. You've helped no one and stopped nothing.

Honestly, I have no idea why you like this response. You SHOULD be arguing that it's to be allowed as a last resort before everything else has been tried and multiple doctors and the parents and child all agree that it is needed as an emergency measure - and I'm referring to surgery here, not talking, which is also GAC.

I still prefer a ban on the GAC surgeries, but that's just me.

Unfortunately it's not.

Body Integrity Disorder, In which the individual believes a body part "does not belong to them" or should be amputated. Therapy and pharmaceutical intervention were so ineffective that people with BID would find other, non-medical ways to remove or amputate their limbs, often leading to complications, sepsis, and death.

These things can happen, how far must trans movements and GAC go before people's limbs get chopped off in the name of Body dysphoria and gender identity? Is it only then something to be alarmed about? Legalizing and funding this crap only makes it more likely to see more people without more limbs. Must admit I'm not yet a fan of the idea. Maybe it'll grow on me. Mutilation has no end. Give people the tools, they'll do more of it. It's like getting a tattoo, gotta try everything once it's out there.

You'd rather let a child die than cut off their limb. This is such an odd conversation to have. Why are you so unendingly interested in the bodies of other children. Just let them do what they need to and worry about your own body.

 

[Exorcet]

I take it then as you're not willing to discuss such "findings" here because they do not exist with credible sources.

I suppose you're not interested again. You could have looked up the findings with less effort than it took you to type this sentence. Is there anything you're interested in?

Biology and sexual orientation - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Altruism (biology) - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

https://www.journals.uchicago.edu/doi/abs/10.1086/300145

Want more? All you need to do is search.

Plenty of treatments already available for body dysphoria and the like. GAC surgery is expensive and irreversible.

Medical treatment costs money, yes. I don't think reversibility is a concern if that's only going to worsen one's life. So, what's the concern here?

Some people argue it is "playing god". Not sure how many of you are religious but there's that. Why use it when other treatments exist.

Then what's wrong with playing god?

Why use GAC? It works.

Danoff brought it up, weird point when he ran out of ideas to use as a rebuttal, yes. As I stated earlier, you can't find a reliable statistic on that. It's a poor point.

You refused to answer a simple question, which is curious. When you finally did answer, you stated to have a preference to let people suffer rather get help. That's a very concerning position and one of the reasons why you're getting so much push back. You're so biased against something that you want to shut out the facts and benefits surrounding it only to repeat minor factors that are common to many areas of medical care, ie cost and risk.

Your argument comes down to medicine is not perfect, therefore ban medicine.

If you lock a child in a padded cell, it's pretty difficult for them to suicide.

So we have two options in this case, lock someone up in a cell to live as long as possible in misery, or give them statistically safe surgery that will let them live a happy and productive life. You favor the cell.

I still prefer a ban on the GAC surgeries, but that's just me.

Which again highlights your desire to control people. Even if there weren't clear benefits to GAC, people have the right to control their own bodies. Banning GAC is the same as banning reconstructive surgery, blood transfusions, whatever else.

But I just came across something else;

Body Integrity Disorder, In which the individual believes a body part "does not belong to them" or should be amputated. Therapy and pharmaceutical intervention were so ineffective that people with BID would find other, non-medical ways to remove or amputate their limbs, often leading to complications, sepsis, and death.

These things can happen, how far must trans movements and GAC go before people's limbs get chopped off in the name of Body dysphoria and gender identity? Is it only then something to be alarmed about? Legalizing and funding this crap only makes it more likely to see more people without more limbs. Must admit I'm not yet a fan of the idea. Maybe it'll grow on me. Mutilation has no end. Give people the tools, they'll do more of it. It's like getting a tattoo, gotta try everything once it's out there.

This doesn't make sense. You're linking GAC with removing limbs. Why? Why not link amputation, actual removal of body parts, with removing limbs. Should we ban amputation? What about prosthetics? Can you imagine if people see artificial body parts and suddenly want want to remove all their human organs and replace them with machines? Let's ban needles too. Can't have people getting the idea that the blood inside of them is toxic and needs to be removed. But then we should also ban the internet so people can't spread messages about psuedoscience which someone might listen to an believe. But then just to be really safe, we should lock everyone up in a padded cell with their arms and legs chained. Then we can sleep at night, against our padded walls, knowing they can't do things we don't like.

It's like getting a tattoo, gotta try everything once it's out there.

And this somehow only applies to GAC (and tattoos I guess). No matter how I look at it, I find it hard to see your position as anything besides heavily biased.

 

[Daniel]

If you lock a child in a padded cell, it's pretty difficult for them to suicide. These padded cells were used for many types of people for many issues... I say child. Adults might be more creative. But danoff brought up suicidal children, so Child+Padded cell seems to work.

I don't know about you, but forcing someone to live in a padded cell doesn't seem like it solves the root issue, and also seems like an incredibly cruel form of treatment.

I suspect a majority of doctors and medical professionals across physical and mental health would instead look for the root issue (ie gender dysphoria) and treat that.

The recommended treatment? Letting them transition.

Body Integrity Disorder, In which the individual believes a body part "does not belong to them" or should be amputated. Therapy and pharmaceutical intervention were so ineffective that people with BID would find other, non-medical ways to remove or amputate their limbs, often leading to complications, sepsis, and death.

These things can happen, how far must trans movements and GAC go before people's limbs get chopped off in the name of Body dysphoria and gender identity? Is it only then something to be alarmed about? Legalizing and funding this crap only makes it more likely to see more people without more limbs. Must admit I'm not yet a fan of the idea. Maybe it'll grow on me. Mutilation has no end. Give people the tools, they'll do more of it. It's like getting a tattoo, gotta try everything once it's out there.

So I read a bit into BIID.

It's similar to gender dysphoria in the sense that those suffering from the two feel like there's a fundamental mismatch between their body and mind. But that's about it.

With gender dysphoria, the mismatch isn't "my mind is disabled but I'm physically abled", but "my mind is one gender, my body isn't" and the recommended treatment is helping the patient live and navigate through society as the gender they identify as.

Sometimes all that will be needed is social transition. For others, they may need hormone treatment, and for others still, they might need surgery. It depends on various circumstances such as access to care, familial support, societal support etc.:

• A trans boy with a supportive upbringing may go on puerty blockers* and won't grow breasts, therefore not needing surgery.
• A trans man who never got the ability to seek gender affirming care as a child would inevitably have grown breasts. If they were large then may have to undergo surgery as part of his GAC. If they were small, he might not.

Like I said, it depends.

For what it's worth, breast removal/reduction surgery isn't solely confied to trans men, as well. Some cis men are even uncomfortable about breast tissue and get surgery to fix it. Cis women also might get breast reduction surgery to mitigate discomfort and pain.


*They're also prescribed to children who experience precocious puberty, and it delays the start of puberty until a more appropriate age so you don't have to be a five year old getting her first period.

 

[Exorcet]

For what it's worth, breast removal/reduction surgery isn't solely confied to trans men, as well. Some cis men are even uncomfortable about breast tissue and get surgery to fix it. Cis women also might get breast reduction surgery to mitigate discomfort and pain.

That's a good point to bring up, because even among the women that are comfortable with breasts there is sometimes a sentiment of inconvenience or annoyance, even if only occasionally. There are a lot of factors than can play into reduction surgery, some of which I'd think would apply to people regardless of trans status. Despite this I don't think I've ever heard an anti-trans/GAC argument reference that particular surgery. Surely it would be off limits for all the sames reasons GAC is?

I also wanted mention something I left out of my earlier posts:

Brain Sex in Transgender Women Is Shifted towards Gender Identity

Transgender people report discomfort with their birth sex and a strong identification with the opposite sex. The current study was designed to shed further light on the question of whether the brains of transgender people resemble their birth sex or their ...

www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

An example of a study showing that trans brains may have traits of the gender they identify with. I bring this up mostly because of past comments in the thread that reference DNA, and the idea of "mental solutions for mental problems". If there is a brain difference, that is absolutely physical and these differences might be the result of DNA alone. If that is the case then I think it does away with the idea of gender issues being only mental.

 

[Famine]

 

[Imari]

If you lock a child in a padded cell, it's pretty difficult for them to suicide. These padded cells were used for many types of people for many issues... I say child. Adults might be more creative. But danoff brought up suicidal children, so Child+Padded cell seems to work.

So that's your plan? Lock children in solitary confinement for the rest of their lives, or until they learn to lie well enough to convince their doctors to let them out?

All that does is teach people that they're better off killing themselves than asking for help. Locking people up as a response to mental health crises does occur, but it's rare for a reason and when it does happen it's a failure of the systems that should have been supporting the person. It is not a valid treatment modality. It is generally considered cruel and unusual punishment.

I shouldn't be surprised that your views of mental health "treatment" comes from the age where lunatic asylums were considered high tech.

 

[Daniel]

View attachment 1319061

Does "asking to use your preferred pronouns" use general or local anaesthesia?

 

[Famine]

Does "asking to use your preferred pronouns" use general or local anaesthesia?

It's all under local. If you're unconscious you can't be... woke.

 

[wheelhp]

This is one of the wildest mish-mashes of incel, conspiracy theory, alt-right, religious fundamentalism plus anti-science AND eugenics (somehow both at the same time) I've seen in a while. That someone could be so obviously interested in a topic and yet so absolutely resolute about not educating themselves or doing anything that might even potentially have impacts on their current stated opinions is bizarre.

If you don't care to learn and alter your opinions, what are you even doing discussing this with other people? Trying to recruit an anti-trans army that you can hang out with on Friday nights for some casual trans bashing?

I'd say someone could benefit from therapy, but that would just be advocating for Big Psychology.

Whats with the accusations. I've never heard this term "incel"...hmm What is it ? and why would I identify with it? I've not said I've identified with any groups left nor right. Should I put it in my bio? Which ones?? Since you're the one claiming I identify with said groups, which you don't know nor care to know squat about me. why don't you go an explain why I should? In the least rude manner possible, if you can even pretend to manage your teenage angst, lol

I'm struggling to understand your point here.

You're suggesting that those at extreme risk of suicide due to gender dysphoria should be admitted to a psychiatric ward and kept in a seclusion room and denied GAC....? Is that all components of GAC or just surgery?

Just GAC surgery. As I've stated earlier. GAC surgery is all I'm against. It is mutilation of the body. GAC itself is okay.

Also, I'm not sure what you're trying to articulate by bringing up BID??

They Crossover. Body disphoria.

@Daniel already handled this as I would have.
You'd rather let a child die than cut off their limb. This is such an odd conversation to have. Why are you so unendingly interested in the bodies of other children. Just let them do what they need to and worry about your own body.

If you ever plan on having kids, lets see you let them cut off their limbs in some delusion to "save their life" (when there's nothing wrong with the limbs, physically) because you couldn't stand the thought of a mental asylum, you think it's the more barbaric of the two. Go cut off your kids limbs. Then we'll talk about "worries" and who the delusional one is. You'll be wheelchairing your kids around every day, taking up your time and energy, and you'll have asked for it. Well, you got it. You asked for it. Enjoy caring for your kid, without limbs, lol. You've completely lost it, and it's not just the limbs...

 

[Daniel]

Just GAC surgery. As I've stated earlier. GAC surgery is all I'm against. GAC itself is okay.

From what I've found, you've said on this thread that:

• Teens have far too much access to surgery,
• It's mutilation, it's just "cutting off the penis and breasts",
• Surgery is a waste of money (i.e. they're "better off saving it"),
• It's a slippery slope into narcissism where people who get gender-affirmation surgery keep wanting more and more.
• There are too many "horror stories" about detransitioning.
• It should be banned. Is that overall, or just to a specific age bracket?

And then for GAC, you say that:

• It's irrelevant to suicidal ideation.
• You say that GAC should be raised to the age of 25.
• Many who get GAC go "full-tilt, knee-deep into surgery".
• It should be avoided because "steroid use is linked with heart disease and early death".

Just getting a little confused, is all

So... GAC itself is okay but it should be restricted to those over 25 and also it should be avoided because steroid use is bad and also it's risky because those who get it end up wanting to get full-on surgery?

Also to help clear things up and ensure that we're not arguing semantics, I'd like to propose the below definitions.

• Gender-affirming care (GAC): Any sort of interventions or ways to support those who are transitioning including mental health support, social support, non-surgical medical support and surgical medical support.
• Hormone replacement therapy (HRT): Medical hormones prescribed to trans people to help them develop the body in a way that aligns with their gender identity. This is a form of non-surgical medical support.
• Puberty blockers: Medication use to delay the onset of puberty. This is a form of non-surgical medical support.
• Gender-affirming surgery (GAS): Surgical procedures that alters a persons appearance in a way that aligns with their gender identity. This is a form of surgical medical support.

 

[wheelhp]

From what I've found, you've said on this thread that:

• Teens have far too much access to surgery,
• It's mutilation, it's just "cutting off the penis and breasts",
• Surgery is a waste of money (i.e. they're "better off saving it"),
• It's a slippery slope into narcissism where people who get gender-affirmation surgery keep wanting more and more.
• There are too many "horror stories" about detransitioning.
• It should be banned. Is that overall, or just to a specific age bracket?

And then for GAC, you say that:

• It's irrelevant to suicidal ideation.
• You say that GAC should be raised to the age of 25.
• Many who get GAC go "full-tilt, knee-deep into surgery".
• It should be avoided because "steroid use is linked with heart disease and early death".

Just getting a little confused, is all

My reply to this is at the end.

So... GAC itself is okay but it should be restricted to those over 25 and also it should be avoided because steroid use is bad and also it's risky because those who get it end up wanting to get full-on surgery?

yes. Repeated steroid use leads to early deaths of ages around say 30-45. Of which people on Gt-planet are okay with, because most of GTplanet is over 55 and willing to let the younger generations suffer and die early "just because it's funny to see them suffer" Or something along those lines IIRC.

Also to help clear things up and ensure that we're not arguing semantics, I'd like to propose the below definitions.

• Gender-affirming care (GAC): Any sort of interventions or ways to support those who are transitioning including mental health support, social support, non-surgical medical support and surgical medical support.
• Hormone replacement therapy (HRT): Medical hormones prescribed to trans people to help them develop the body in a way that aligns with their gender identity. This is a form of non-surgical medical support.
• Puberty blockers: Medication use to delay the onset of puberty. This is a form of non-surgical medical support.
• Gender-affirming surgery (GAS): Surgical procedures that alters a persons appearance in a way that aligns with their gender identity. This is a form of surgical medical support.

I have changed my opinion on some things, but not many. It's curious how you have all the time in the world to write up essays on effectively "an opinion, made by one person, whom I don't like" curious. One has to wonder why you'd engage in "civil discourse" with a person you don't like and an opinion you disagree with if there were better, more interesting, more constructive, things to talk about in millions of other threads. There are. I have my opinion, and I'll discuss it only with people whom are here in good-faith. Not too many of those. Most are just here for the instant gratification they get by hurling insults at others in a closed-off forum with their "follower" buddies with their grandfathered accounts. It's quite cliquey. Which is why I'm not all that interested in talking to those types in the first place.

We'll go with your definitions then, I've no desire to halt progress for the few that are aren't here for petty memes from 2008.

 

[Shaun]

Just GAC surgery. As I've stated earlier. GAC surgery is all I'm against. It is mutilation of the body. GAC itself is okay.

Why are you so worried about what others do to their own body?
What's the issue here and how can it possibly affect your own life in any way?

 

[Daniel]

One thing to remember is that the amount of steroid use for bodybuilders and extreme athletes is probably very different than the amounts prescribed by doctors to trans patients. I suspect it's inaccurate to say that trans people who take hormones will die at 30-45:

Twenty-five percent of the trans cohort died by the age of 69, compared with 25% of the non-trans cohort by the age of 75, and half of the trans cohort died by the age of 77, compared with half of the non-trans cohort by the age of 84.

Differences in All-Cause Mortality Among Transgender and Non-Transgender People Enrolled in Private Insurance

It is true that trans people have a shorter life expectancy than cis people, however more research needs to be done to indicate how much shorter. On top of that, doctors are more concerned with other, more pressing health issues facing trans people than the heightened risk of HRT.

---

Yes, HRT can pose a higher risk to cardiovascular health for trans people, however at the end of the day, so does smoking, and transphobic legislation, and mental health issues that can be exacerbated by being treated like an outcast in society.

It should be up to the individual to decide what's right for them so long as they're made aware and have been determined to be of sound mind.

I don't know about you, but I think it's a pretty sound decision for someone to take HRT if it means they have a chance of a healthier (and potentially even longer, as suicide risk is decreased!) life.

I have changed my opinion on some things, but not many. It's curious how you have all the time in the world to write up essays on effectively "an opinion, made by one person, whom I don't like" curious. One has to wonder why you'd engage in "civil discourse" with a person you don't like and an opinion you disagree with if there were better, more interesting, more constructive, things to talk about in millions of other threads. There are. I have my opinion, and I'll discuss it only with people whom are here in good-faith. Not too many of those. Most are just here for the instant gratification they get by hurling insults at others in a closed-off forum with their "follower" buddies with their grandfathered accounts. It's quite cliquey. Which is why I'm not all that interested in talking to those types in the first place.

We'll go with your definitions then, I've no desire to halt progress for the few that are aren't here for petty memes from 2008.

That took about half an hour for me to type up as I was procrastinating some work . This is a forum where people can post opinions and have discussions about said opinions. I wanted to add to the discussion, but felt that it was important to get clarity on what you were meaning so we didn't have to discuss semantics 🤷

 

[wheelhp]

One thing to remember is that the amount of steroid use for bodybuilders and extreme athletes is probably very different than the amounts prescribed by doctors to trans patients. I suspect it's inaccurate to say that trans people who take hormones will die at 30-45:



Differences in All-Cause Mortality Among Transgender and Non-Transgender People Enrolled in Private Insurance

It is true that trans people have a shorter life expectancy than cis people, however more research needs to be done to indicate how much shorter. On top of that, doctors are more concerned with other, more pressing health issues facing trans people than the heightened risk of HRT.

I'm just guessing the ages too, could be more realistically 40-65. But my point remains these people aren't as likely to live as long as "normal" straight people that do not do the whole steroids and reckless amounts of substances thing.

---

Yes, HRT can pose a higher risk to cardiovascular health for trans people, however at the end of the day, so does smoking, and transphobic legislation, and mental health issues that can be exacerbated by being treated like an outcast in society.

It should be up to the individual to decide what's right for them so long as they're made aware and have been determined to be of sound mind.

There are very few people in the 18-25 range that can be said to be "of sound mind at all times" That's the age where people is really just starting to learn about things and make many more mistakes. So your fallacy is there. It seems unfortunately your logic doesn't extend to benefit mankind, just the simple pleasantries followed by the "now get off my lawn, stranger" trope...

I don't know about you, but I think it's a pretty sound decision for someone to take HRT if it means they have a chance of a healthier (and potentially even longer, as suicide risk is decreased!) life.

See the issue for me is "suicide risk decreased". I'll wait for the next study to come out saying the opposite, "suicide risk increased". It'll come for some people it'll be relevant especially with de-trans crowd . Ask any regular street hooker if they wished they ended up in that line of work. I'll wait. You stray too far from the norm, you basically throw your life away to a certain "normal" crowd of highly opinionated and vetted people. The rest of society just shrugs and carries on. This is something trans people have to deal with too. Additionally Some of them will feel some kind of imposter syndrome not long after their journey into steroids begins.

That took about half an hour for me to type up as I was procrastinating some work . This is a forum where people can post opinions and have discussions about said opinions. I wanted to add to the discussion, but felt that it was important to get clarity on what you were meaning so we didn't have to discuss semantics 🤷

I guess anything will do when it comes to procrastination. Half an hour is a bit shorter than I'd have thought.

Why are you so worried about what others do to their own body?
What's the issue here and how can it possibly affect your own life in any way?

Already answered this. You didn't read above, the answer was hypothetical "if you have kids, this will cross your mind" otherwise no reason to think about future generations. Once you're dead, you're dead, all your worries die with it. Death is the complete antithesis to life, for all who try to stay alive.
You not thinking about the long-term is stupid funny now, but when you're there, you won't be laughing.

 

[Shaun]

You didn't read above

Nope, I've read everything you have written.

I'll ask again, how does it affect you if anyone chooses to do whatever they choose to their own body?

 

[Daniel]

I'm just guessing the ages too, could be more realistically 40-65. But my point remains these people aren't as likely to live as long as "normal" straight people that do not do the whole steroids and reckless amounts of substances thing.

No, your point was that HRT should be avoided because it's bad because bodybuilders die early from taking too many steroids. I don't disagree that HRT poses a risk, and I agree with you that trans people have a higher morality rate than cis people, but that doesn't mean that a trans person shouldn't ever take hormones. They're made aware of the risks and benefits and go through an entire process with their doctors to get the right dose, and have their health monitored to mitigate any risks.

The benefit from that? Overwhelmingly positive: reduced symptoms of anxiety and depression, lowered perceived and social distress, improved quality of life and improved self-esteem.

That's vastly different than recreational steroid use which -- to quote you -- can involve "reckless amounts of substances."

There are very few people in the 18-25 range that can be said to be "of sound mind at all times". That's the age where people is really just starting to learn about things and make many more mistakes

It's certainly a good thing that we have physicians, psychologists, psychiatrists, endocrinologists and cardiologists who can make that determination to be sure someone is not just making a mistake.

So your fallacy is there. It seems unfortunately your logic doesn't extend to benefit mankind, just the simple pleasantries followed by the "now get off my lawn, stranger" trope...

I have no idea what you mean by this.

See the issue for me is "suicide risk decreased". I'll wait for the next study to come out saying the opposite, "suicide risk increased". It'll come for some people it'll be relevant especially with de-trans crowd .

Why would you ignore the countless studies that show a drop in suicide risk thanks to GAC to wait on something that confirms an increase?

Ask any regular street hooker if they wished they ended up in that line of work. I'll wait. You stray too far from the norm, you basically throw your life away to a certain "normal" crowd of highly opinionated and vetted people. The rest of society just shrugs and carries on. This is something trans people have to deal with too. Additionally Some of them will feel some kind of imposter syndrome not long after their journey into steroids begins.

What does this have to do with being trans and seeking gender-affirming care? Are you trying to suggest that people who transition suddenly 'find' themselves having gone too far and regret it and end up wanting to detransition?

Oh boy do I have some numbers to show you.

Let's say you have 100 transgender people.
13 of them decided to detransition.
11 of that 13 detransitioned because of external pressures. This means that factors that came from other people. Employers, parents, schools, churches, social stigma. In other words, if those 11 had supportive and loving communities, they may not have decided to detransition.
Only the remaining two had internal doubts and confusion.
Do you know what happened with the remaining 87? They didn't detransition.

Detransitioning for reasons that are not external pressure is incredibly unlikely.

And before you say "but some people might regret transitioning but feel pressured to stay transgender," I will add the following:

Wiepjes CM, Nota NM, de Blok CJM, et al.: The Amsterdam cohort of gender dysphoria study (1972–2015): Trends in prevalence, treatment, and regrets. J Sex Med 2018;15:582–590
All existing data suggest that regret following gender affirmation is rare. For example, in a large cohort study of TGD people who underwent medical and surgical gender affirmation, rates of surgical regret among those who underwent gonadectomy were 0.6% for transgender women and 0.3% for transgender men.

Surgery -- the most irreversible form of gender-affirming care -- regret is so low, that if you had 100 trans people who had undergone surgery, less than one of them would have regretted it.

That isn't to say that anyone who detransitions isn't going through an awful and confusing experience, but that doesn't make sense to be against various forms of gender-affirming care because a fraction of a fraction decided it wasn't for them.

 

[wheelhp]

Nope, I've read everything you have written.

I'll ask again, how does it affect you if anyone chooses to do whatever they choose to their own body?

I find your question boring and derailing, but if you insist...
Maybe it doesn't affect you or how your peers are doing, or how your grandma is doing or how your kids are doing because you don't give a flying crap, maybe you're selfish like that, but not all people have to be or think just like you y'know?? If someone writes about something, and you don't like it, you don't have to respond? Just scroll along or "unfollow" the threads you don't have anything to do with or nothing to say? So to answer your question, these new trends do affect the world, and, therefore, me. It affects me "so much" that I have to write about it on GT Planet, in the trans thread of course.

Would you say the same thing to trans people? What does it matter that they care about their own bodies to such an extent that they want to change it? Good luck trying to change that if you think like that.

 

[Daniel]

Would you say the same thing to trans people? What does it matter that they care about their own bodies to such an extent that they want to change it? Good luck trying to change that if you think like that.

I believe that @Shaun is asking why you seem to be so against various forms of gender-affirming care, if it doesn't ultimately affect you?

 

[wheelhp]

I believe the point Shaun is trying to make is that: let trans people do what they want to do, especially if it doesn't hurt you.

Right I mixed up my wording there at the end. He can have his point, certainly. Doesn't mean I have to agree with it.

 

[Daniel]

Right I mixed up my wording there at the end. He can have his point, certainly. Doesn't mean I have to agree with it.

You can certainly disagree with and have differing opinions on various topics but surely you'd agree that it's important for you opinions to be well-informed, no?

 

[wheelhp]

No, your point was that HRT should be avoided because it's bad because bodybuilders die early from taking too many steroids. I don't disagree that HRT poses a risk, and I agree with you that trans people have a higher morality rate than cis people, but that doesn't mean that a trans person shouldn't ever take hormones. They're made aware of the risks and benefits and go through an entire process with their doctors to get the right dose, and have their health monitored to mitigate any risks.

The benefit from that? Overwhelmingly positive: reduced symptoms of anxiety and depression, lowered perceived and social distress, improved quality of life and improved self-esteem.

General anxiety and depression is not something that goes away quickly, so a moot point, those things tend to return very quickly. Depression especially stays with the person for decades once the newness of transitioning wears off, I believe.

That's vastly different than recreational steroid use which -- to quote you -- can involve "reckless amounts of substances."

It's certainly a good thing that we have physicians, psychologists, psychiatrists, endocrinologists and cardiologists who can make that determination to be sure someone is not just making a mistake.

In recent years, all of those professions have lost their credibility, to me at least. Some people think all doctors are full of it. I just make exceptions to the doctors I like. They're not all money hungry, as it turns out, but still can't be trusted with even basic things.

I have no idea what you mean by this.

Why would you ignore the countless studies that show a drop in suicide risk thanks to GAC to wait on something that confirms an increase?

What does this have to do with being trans and seeking gender-affirming care? Are you trying to suggest that people who transition suddenly 'find' themselves having gone too far and regret it and end up wanting to detransition?

I'm saying the Exposure to trans movements can make one rethink their life and find themselves trans instead of something else. Which in itself is not always a good result, somewhat unnecessary depending on person. Of course I can't speak for everyone.

Oh boy do I have some numbers to show you.

Let's say you have 100 transgender people.
13 of them decided to detransition.
11 of that 13 detransitioned because of external pressures. This means that factors that came from other people. Employers, parents, schools, churches, social stigma. In other words, if those 11 had supportive and loving communities, they may not have decided to detransition.
Only the remaining two had internal doubts and confusion.
Do you know what happened with the remaining 87? They didn't detransition.

Detransitioning for reasons that are not external pressure is incredibly unlikely.

And before you say "but some people might regret transitioning but feel pressured to stay transgender," I will add the following:

Surgery -- the most irreversible form of gender-affirming care -- regret is so low, that if you had 100 trans people who had undergone surgery, less than one of them would have regretted it.

That isn't to say that anyone who detransitions isn't going through an awful and confusing experience, but that doesn't make sense to be against various forms of gender-affirming care because a fraction of a fraction decided it wasn't for them.

Right. I'll wait for the studies of that same group in 20 years time, convince me 20 years later that same group, by at least a majority, did not regret a single aspect of their transition, and I'd have my mind changed quite a bit.

Usually takes a person a good decade or so to fully evaluate once the dust settles. "was that event a good idea" "was that relationship good for my growth" "did my transition ultimately do anything for me that I couldn't have accomplished in other ways with less money down the drain? maybe that money could have gone towards the mortgage?"

Of course if you ask someone "did you have a good birthday?", they'd say yes, if you asked them on their birthday... But Ask them a decade later about that same day, the truth will come out about all that went on, assuming the person even remembers the details by that point. Just an example.

 

[Daniel]

General anxiety and depression is not something that goes away quickly, so a moot point, those things tend to return very quickly. Depression especially stays with the person for decades once the newness of transitioning wears off, I believe.

Citation needed.

I'm saying the Exposure to trans movements can make one rethink their life and find themselves trans instead of something else. Which in itself is not always a good result, somewhat unnecessary depending on person. Of course I can't speak for everyone.

I could say the opposite. If someone finds out that being trans is a real thing, and it gives them the words to describe what they've been feeling since childhood, don't you think that's a good thing?

Right. I'll wait for the studies of that same group in 20 years time, convince me 20 years later that same group, by at least a majority, did not regret a single aspect of their transition, and I'd have my mind changed quite a bit.

Usually takes a person a good decade or so to fully evaluate once the dust settles. "was that event a good idea" "was that relationship good for my growth" "did my transition ultimately do anything for me that I couldn't have accomplished in other ways with less money down the drain?"

Good thing that study looked at trans people from the 1970s all the way up to 2015.

The Amsterdam Cohort of Gender Dysphoria Study (1972-2015): Trends in Prevalence, Treatment, and Regrets - PubMed

The number of people with gender identity issues seeking professional help increased dramatically in recent decades. The percentage of people who regretted gonadectomy remained small and did not show a tendency to increase. Wiepjes CM, Nota NM, de Blok CJM, et al. The Amsterdam Cohort of Gender...

pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

What I seem to be getting from you is that you're against trans people transitioning surgically and via hormones, even though the present data overwhelming says they are beneficial aside from a very small number of outliers but because the data doesn't outright say "this group didn't have a single regret," it's not good enough?

 

[Shaun]

So to answer your question, these new trends do affect the world, and, therefore, me. It affects me "so much" that I have to write about it on GT Planet, in the trans thread of course.

Yeah great, but how?
You still haven't answered the question.

Would you say the same thing to trans people? What does it matter that they care about their own bodies to such an extent that they want to change it?

Again, why would I care.
It's their choice, if whatever they want to do by all means go for it. Unless someone is directly infringing on my rights it's none of my business how they choose to live their lives.

I just don't get it, why would I want someone I don't even know not want to be happy.

 

[Daniel]

Yeah great, but how?
You still haven't answered the question.

Again, why would I care.
It's their choice, if whatever they want to do by all means go for it. Unless someone is directly infringing on my rights it's none of my business how they choose to live their lives.

I just don't get it, why would I want someone I don't even know not want to be happy.

Because they might get a heart attack in their 60s instead of their 80s.

 

[wheelhp]

Citation needed.

Indeed. Depression doesn't go away instantly though, everyone knows this. There's no "quick fix" for it, you have to do the time to recover. Just like no quick fix for cancers.

I could say the opposite. If someone finds out that being trans is a real thing, and it gives them the words to describe what they've been feeling since childhood, don't you think that's a good thing?

Couldn't that just be a delusional feeling? "I suddenly feel like a person that needs to transition...to benefit myself, look at all these happy transitioned people, this is my calling now, it fits, the shoe fits!" But if you insist.. Good yes, but not every movement is good just because it's popular.

Good thing that study looked at trans people from the 1970s all the way up to 2015.

The Amsterdam Cohort of Gender Dysphoria Study (1972-2015): Trends in Prevalence, Treatment, and Regrets - PubMed

The number of people with gender identity issues seeking professional help increased dramatically in recent decades. The percentage of people who regretted gonadectomy remained small and did not show a tendency to increase. Wiepjes CM, Nota NM, de Blok CJM, et al. The Amsterdam Cohort of Gender...

pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

What I seem to be getting from you is that you're against trans people transitioning surgically and via hormones, even though the present data overwhelming says they are beneficial aside from a very small number of outliers but because the data doesn't outright say "this group didn't have a single regret," it's not good enough?

If a majority didn't have a single, significant regret in 10-20 years time I'd have to change my mind.

What would you like to cite from that study you linked, to disprove my position?