Should kids medically transition? | Jesse Singal | Just Asking Questions, Ep. 21
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 30 май 2024
- Jesse Signal questions the science of "gender affirming care."
Subscribe
RUclips: / reasontv
Apple: podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast...
Spotify: open.spotify.com/show/5SpySKA...
Text and links to sources available here: reason.com/podcast/2024/05/02...
Chapters:
00:00:00 Introduction to the Show and Topic: Kids and Gender Transition
00:02:14 Media Coverage and Jesse Singal's Insights
00:04:50 The Impact of Social Media and Activism on Youth Gender Medicine
00:09:36 Exploring the Tavistock Controversy and Its Implications
00:12:38 The Debate on Informed Consent and Medical Ethics
00:28:37 Social Contagion Theory and Its Effects on Gender Identity
00:34:03 Scrutinizing the Science Behind Gender Affirming Treatments
00:42:32 Navigating the Complexities of Youth Gender Medicine
00:43:03 The Role of Data and Evidence in Gender Transition Debates
00:44:34 The Impact of Politics and Misinformation on Transgender Healthcare
00:47:34 Exploring the Cass Review's Recommendations on Gender Medicine
00:49:24 Comparing Gender Medicine Practices: UK vs. USA
00:51:25 The Influence of Activism and Politics on Medical Standards
00:55:16 Addressing the Concerns Around Puberty Blockers and Hormone Treatments
01:20:32 Just Ask Us Questions: A Discussion of anarcho-capitalist Security
Should kids medically transition between genders?
The number of kids diagnosed with gender dysphoria has surged in recent years. In America, diagnoses have almost tripled from about 15,000 to more than 42,000 between 2017 to 2021. In the United Kingdom, the number of minors referred to the national Gender Identity Development Service grew from 51 in 2009 to 1,766 by 2016, leading to years' long waitlists for care within the government-run health system.
This surge caused England's National Health Service to commission an extensive study of youth gender treatment. That study is known as The Cass Review, and its results dropped on April 10. The review's author, former head of the Royal College of Pediatrics Hilary Cass, concluded that modern youth gender dysphoria interventions are informed by "remarkably weak evidence" drawing on studies "exaggerated by people on all sides of the debate to support their viewpoint" and that "we have no good evidence on the long-term outcomes of interventions to manage gender-related distress." The science, it turns out, is not settled-or anywhere close to it.
NHS England opted to stop routine prescriptions of puberty blockers following the review's publication, as have NHS Scotland and the Welsh Government. Major American medical groups like the American Psychiatric Association, American Medical Association and American Academy of Pediatrics, all of which endorse prescribing puberty blockers for gender-dysphoric kids, have yet to officially respond.
American media coverage of the Review, which seems to throw the entire youth gender treatment paradigm in this country into question, has been remarkably muted. But today's guest is never muted. Jesse Singal has been covering this topic-and taken a lot of heat for it-for years in the pages of publications like The Atlantic, The Dispatch, and on his substack, Singal-Minded.
Sources referenced in Just Ask Us Questions:
• A private libertarian ...
• Don't 'Abolish the Pol...
The fact that this is even considered a serious question is alarmingly stupid.
I was told years ago by someone in the medical profession that hormones are important to the development of not just genitals, but also bones and even the brain. To block hormones during the developmental years is causing harm to children medically.
Yes. We have evidence that puberty blockers lowers IQ and causes more bone-related injuries, such as fractures and joint problems. We knew this before the trans craze, we have the studies. But the data has been swept under the rug because it doesn’t fit the feel-good narrative.
No. Children cannot consent. Next question.
It's the parents decision
You have to do medically transition _before_ they reach puberty. Because if you don’t, then you won’t visibly pass as the opposite gender you choose.
This is extremely important.
@@Justin_Beaver564 If this isn't simply a troll comment, you deserve to spend a few decades in prison right alongside the ghouls who commit this atrocity on their children.
What if the parents are idiots?
@@RyuBateson218 Still not the government's business. A lot of children are raised by idiots.
No
It’s child abuse
No. Absolutely not. Kids cannot consent. Why’s that so hard to understand? Leave them alone.
mutilating people is not "treatment"
As a person on the left, I feel like I’m taking crazy pills on this. I remember all of the science literacy people around me had for seeing that HCQ and Ivermectin didn’t work and now those same people are blind to how bad the science is on hormones for kids. They understood RCTs and sample sizes and everything else that makes a study good, but now all gone.
No. What a ridiculous question.
This is a medical science issue, not a social or political one. In medical science we are required to support therapies with evidence. Would anyone here want to take an unproven therapy? Consent, parental approval, "affirming" identity should really be beside the point. Admittedly we have traditionally engaged in treatments without evidence when the benefit seemed to be obvious only to find that randomized trials didn't support these long-held beliefs. We used to prescribe antibiotics liberally for sinusitis for example. It's "obvious" that if you had green snot coming from your nose that an antibiotic would cure it. This was found to be wrong and we stopped. Aspirin to prevent a first heart attack? Nope. Surgically remove every appendix? Not any more. Eggs are bad for your heart? Uh Uh. All of these have been widely held "beliefs" that did not stand up to scientific scrutiny. Medical science evolves. It seems to me that gender affirming care has weaker scientific support than any of these prior examples. This is not bigotry, it's simply adherence to scientific standards. If the current science is weak then we need better studies rather than defaulting to giving patients what they "want". That is a recipe for widespread harm. The placebo-controlled, randomized trial (the gold standard of medical investigation) is glaringly absent from this area of investigation. It's not that it couldn't be done but rather that it's not politically possible. When the widely-held belief is that a child will commit suicide if such therapy is withheld how do you get patients and parent to consent to randomization in a trial? But the reality is that this is what needs to happen.
Much like denying their kids vaccines, this is an American thing. This is not really a problem that exists in actual reality. While to right-wing voters, this is THE most important issue in the world.
"This is a medical science issue" Yes. "[N]ot a social or political one." Except, it has been made into a social and political issue by the Identitarian wing of the Progressive Socialist wing of the Democratic party. So, you can either not engage them, which may mean they pass laws and regulations they shouldn't pass, and they do so unchecked, or you can engage them with the best approach you can think of. So, what would that approach be? Well, you could just say to everyone who politicizes any given topic, "This is not a political issue, just leave it alone," or you can question the political assertions being made, and push back when it makes sense to. I don't think there is a one size fits all best option here. I think it depends on your personality, and your relationship to those with whom you may butt heads on this issue. But I think it is important to realize that while this should not be a political issue, it has been made into one, and we're stuck with that reality. Part of what I try to do is speak to that meta issue: basically nothing should be political; here's why. Now, let's see what we agree should be political, and talk about what to do about that.
@@FifthConcerto
Wow, so many "wings" in this political system. Dude. There is no "leftist" party. There is no "woke" party. And even if there was... These gender issues arent real. They are trigger bait in social media. Not politics. They are 100% manufactured for the sole purpose of enraging christians and people above 60.
If you go along your life pretending this does not exist, then nothing will change. There are so many real things in life to worry or care about. Without having to invent new stuff on top of it.
We now live in a post Cass World 🌎
No kids should be ever considered for drugging & "transitioning" - it's abuse.
The psychological side doesn't matter if the interventions are physically incompatible with the genome of the patient.
Estrogen does not signal the synthesis of the same proteins in the same cells of someone with a Y chromosome as someone with two X's.
Using an incompatible programming language in a program written to accept a programming language with a different codex causes parsing errors. With DNA, that means malfunctioning body systems and cancer.
Not sure how much you know about the medical side of things, but this is wildly inaccurate. Men already produce estrogen, just like women already produce testosterone. The only difference is in quantity. Granted, changing the quantity does have side effects, but it is not as though either sex is incompatible with a specific sex hormone.
@kalamari3288 Its not a matter of if they are present in the system its what they code for. An easy example is, 95% of the genes on the y chromosome are not present in the female genome at all. This includes proteins that are signaled to be synthesized by the concentration of testosterone his cells are exposed to. Natural selection optimizes the body to run without outside endocrine interference. If a protein synthesis signal compount (a hormone) is artificially brought to a concentration that that genome has not had many generations to optimize it for, the consquences will be the equivalent of running a machine on something it isn't made for. Like an engine with too much or too little oil for its reservoir size.
@@kalamari3288 The dose makes the poison. Too little testosterone and too much estrogen causes testicular and prostate atrophy.
Our bodies are adapted to a specific amount of certain hormones, not just any amount.
Consent matters. There is no good data to provide for this from an evidence based standpoint. The risk of harm is significant. Doctors are to do no harm. One can not ethically provide elective sterilization to children.
This conversation is always framed around the intervention being good if the child persists into adulthood, but I think we need to examine if they are good at all. Loss of sexual function, lowered bone density, infertility. I think we need to ask ourselves if these tradeoffs are worthwhile at all when we treat, what is essentially a mental health issue. What medical risk is usually acceptable for other mental health issues? And if this is different, then why is that?
Why even use this manipulative language "transition". It's impossible in every meaningful way.
Found the conservative
Exactly! There's no such thing as "transitioning." A combination of invasive cosmetic surgery and cocktail of hormonal drugs can help someone pretend to be the opposite sex.
@@Justin_Beaver564The trans cult based their flag on 1940's sexist stereotypes. It's 2024 blue isn't masculine or feminine just like pink. Trans are a bunch of alt-conservatives
In the 1950s it was all the rage to get a lobotomy. It was though to be a good thing. A few decades before that, x-rays were used to check shoe fit at the shoe store. It won't be too far into the future gender transition will be considered barbaric.
Natural puberty alleviates most of these issues, you'd think people who believed in science would comprehend that.
If we put some children on puberty blockers wouldn't that put them on a different developmental stage than their age cohort once they're allowed to enter puberty? If so, couldn't that cause other mental health issues as those children will be left at a lower developmental stage and maturity than their age cohort? Mental health issues such as not identifying with your age cohort because you're constantly at a lower stage of development than they are, their bodies are changing drastically later than their age cohorts causing further mental health issues and identity issues.
It seems that the healthiest, most medically ethical thing to do is let puberty happen naturally and address the issues that remain after natural puberty.
Edit: Added comment
Endogenous (natural) puberty is precisely the time when gender dysphoria can worsen in adolescents who are very likely to be trans. Hence the purpose of puberty blockers.
@@rebeccawinter472 Do you think having humans of the same age cohort but at different developmental stages is a good thing for those humans? Blocking puberty would put those humans at a lower developmental stage than their age cohort which could lead to even more mental health issues.
Do you truly think a 15 year old who has yet to enter puberty will have no mental health issues when everyone else in their age cohort has been in puberty for a few years and are at a much higher developmental stage? Do you truly think that won't affect the human body and mental health in any negative way? How is an 18 year old who entered puberty two years prior due to medically delaying puberty going to cope with their age cohort who entered puberty up to 10 years earlier naturally?
Puberty not only develops the body, it also develops the mind. Do you truly want humans at different mind development stages? Do you truly want 18 year olds who are mentally 13 when everyone else in there age cohort is mentally 18? Then, in college, you want mentally 15 year olds attempting to deal with life with mentally 20 year olds. How is this anything other than setting those humans up for failure.
Unless there is a medically necessary reason for puberty blockers, such as precious puberty, giving puberty blockers to humans should be malpractice.
@@rebeccawinter472 It is also the cure in almost all cases. We must help them to weather the storm.
If a young child wants to be a walrus, should individuals in society transition that child?
Not the government's business
@@Justin_Beaver564 Correct, but it is the business of that child's family and people around them in their community. No child should ever be transitioned in any form, because they do not understand the ramifications. Nor should that be encouraged. If a parent wants to give their 5 year old a tattoo, this would obviously be wrong, and other family members, friends, and their community should step in.
@@microsoftpain I see it as a parental rights issue that the government has no business in. These new "libertarians" aren't really libertarians. They're just conservatives who wanted to hijack the label.
Christ, you people are weird...
great point
Of course not, next question.
The absurdity of this even being a topic is in the reasoning behind it first. Being a child is tough. Minorities get picked on. Nerds get picked on. Everyone gets teased for what they like and what they don't like. Pretending like changing the physical appearance of someone struggling with identity, will make them feel more accepted is absurd as giving a nerd muscle implants so they can fit in with the jocks. Sexuality and identity is confusing even into adulthood. The most corrupt and evil part of the argument is when doctors will tell the patients that the procedures are "reversible." Anyone that argues that a child can consent to this, must also argue they can consent to ANYTHING. Let's lower the age of voting, driving, smoking and drinking to age 10. All of those decisions do less to permanently change their future than puberty blockers or surgery.
Lots of people in the comments seem to find it virtuous to answer from the hip rather than thoughtfully considering the question.
The answer is, of course, no. But the process matters.
I don't disagree with the heart of what you're saying but do find it entertaining that you spent 85% of your comment criticizing people answering the question in an unconsidered, thoughtless manner and the other 15% of your comment answering the question in an unconsidered, thoughtless manner (by your own definition)
@@Joe_for_real I’d hope one can see the difference between having a conviction about what the answer is but still considering the question versus just deciding you know what the answer is right off the bat. Can you not tell the difference?
@@jacobstamm I can. You obviously can't because your only word on the question at hand was "the answer is no, of course". How is that different than any of the other comments?
@@Joe_for_real Because I accept and value the act of seriously considering the question.
Good God. You can lead a horse to water.
@@jacobstamm How did you demonstrate that? The only thing you said is "the answer is no, of course". You threw in the "of course" which indicates that the answer should be obvious to anyone. So your insightful comment on the question was essentially "the answer is no and it should be obvious to anyone" while at the same time you accuse other commenters of not properly considering the question before answering.
If you are going to criticize people in a public forum you shouldn't exhibit the very behavior you're criticizing. If you can't see the contradiction in your comment then all I can say is that I have indeed lead you to water and you have refused to drink.
There are two issues that need to be addressed before you can have a discussion.
1. Genital mutilation of children. I thought this was illegal in Western Countries. Has anything changed on this issue?
2. If children are to be allowed to make a gender altering decision, do they need parental consent or not. It seem like an adult kind of decision. If they are allowed to make this kind of decision, then the age of majority (adulthood) should be lowered. At what age are children wishing to first transition? Then, that should be the age of majority.
....then the when argument is a moot point. Transition, drink, smoke, get married, and so forth. Children are doing all these other things anyway.
"Why would anyone identify as Goth?" I hear while sitting here painting my nails black between a Christian Death & Dracula poster
Were it not for the insistence amongst feminist ideologues that any difference between the sexes is evidence of sexism, the debate surrounding the mutability of sex would have been kept at the margins of serious discussion. And yet because gender studies department have been instructing the nonsense of sex as a spectrum, the ideology has infected all professions without the need for evidence
Well said.
There is never a situation where that is necessary
It's a parental rights issue between the child and parents. Not the government's business.
@@Justin_Beaver564 And if the parents want to have s3x with their kids, that's also none of the government's business, right?
@@Justin_Beaver564 and where are the rights of a child? Children cannot consent to sterilization
You have to do medically transition _before_ they reach puberty. Because if you don’t, then you won’t visibly pass as the opposite gender you choose.
This is extremely important.
@@user-wl2xl5hm7k and? Children do not have the mental development to make permanent decisions like sterilization
Why does it take an hour and a half to say, no?
First, we don’t have the technology to transition yet. It’s plastic surgery. A true transition would involve DNA manipulation, pelvic bone surgery, implanting a complete artificial or donor reproductive systems, and some brain surgery.
Second, kids change their mind all the time. Even the ones who “knew” they were the opposite gender since they were in the womb.
Third, the treatment is not usually successful. They’re definitely still their original gender, and they’re generally unhappy after the surgery. Some hate the results and commit suicide.
Fourth, the treatment for gender dysphoria and depression is psychological. If, after years and years of therapy haven’t worked at all, if they want to get placebo treatments that in their mind make them look a tiny bit more like their “desired” gender, then OK. But therapy works well for this condition if you give it enough time. And also years of therapy implies that they’ll be an adult by the time that decision should be made.
….it would - but the science isn’t there yet. So we should just let the trans kids suffer until the science is there? Cause they make us uncomfortable and threaten our binary gender norms? We should be more cautious, for sure. We need better funding and research and not to hand out prescriptions like candy - but for kids who are experiencing dysphoria and trauma due to their developing body, puberty blockers can save lives.
Therapy doesn’t always work. That’s called correction therapy and in Canada here it is illegal - moreover we know that people’s sexual orientation or gender identity can’t be counselled away.
It wasn’t that Keira Bell’s case per se acted as a catalyst for the Cass review, it was that during the hearings of the judicial review that Keira Bell brought the NHS was asked to provide evidence for its decision making and it didn’t have any, or what it claimed was evidence wasn’t. So the government thought an independent review should be conducted into what evidence, if any, existed. That independent review was headed by Hilary Cass.
Maybe Katie will finally give Jesse a raise now
She would never lift the revenue split from 90/10.
Nice... I was confused about what kind of channel you were until now, thanks.
Only in this era of over educated numbs-skulls would this even be a question. Allow puberty, to do it's job. As a parent you need to recognize, this is a pedagogic moment. Your leadership and stewardship of this issue could not be more important to your child. This is a critical time for you to teach your child that decisions have consequences. A child has no reference point or understanding of puberty. By 18 y/o the physical maturation for most is complete. Then it's a question of intellectual and emotional maturity. A high hurdle, indeed. But a humble child and wise parenting can steer a successful course through these rough waters. But I want to emphasize, you are not a friend, you are not a buddy, you are a mom, dad, parent. And sometimes being a parent or a leader means doing the unpopular or painful things, for the long-term benefit.
@whatap-reason_TV_2 why is that?
Gender affirming care strikes me as problematic as it feeds into a delusion. I don't understand why many in the psychiatric community think this is ok. I always thought the idea is to help the patient to deal with reality, not to support their delusion. Nothing wrong with being a man who feels "feminine", or a woman who feels "masculine". And as a result they may want to appear more like how they feel. Fine. Do what thou wilt. But just because they feel that way, doesn't make them the opposite sex as defined by their physiology. This strikes me as post modernist thinking run amok where reality is whatever we want it to be. Tell that to the bus when you walk out in front of it.
I must say, Dawn Burlers retraction was the bravest thing I've seen a politician do in a long time. Good on her! 1:00:32
Thank you for this thoughtful, curious, and humble discussion on an important topic. The tribalism prevalent in contemporary society seems to have increased certainty on everything when sometimes the only reasonable, responsible position is "we don't know, and anyone who claims to know is trying to sell you something." It seems this point is lost on a lot of the commenters here, most of whom I suspect chimed in without ever listening to your conversation. Also, "pervert for nuance" is my new favorite expression.
Should children medically transition based on something that doesn't even hold water as a concept, let alone research?
Just asking questions
no one is trans, but some people are emotionally disturbed
excellent
1:10:00 You hit it on the nail Jesse. This is at the root at where at the lot of the toxic energy comes from. Hopefully everyone listens to this point as it’s crucial.
If the numbers are due to a more open society since 2010 and more people coming out and if it is true that without treatment they will commit suicide, then where is the evidence of massive amounts of suicides of young girls and boys prior to that?
Kids need to be going outside and touching grass. Not having unnecessary medical procedures.
The answer is "no"
The reason is that it's irreversible and at that age you do not have the capacity to plan that far ahead. Most cases they'll revert their identity after leaving their peers
Let kids figure out what they will be, LEAVE THEM ALONE, DO NOT ASK THEM THIS STUFF, they will know when they are in their early teens like it has ALWAYS BEEN !!!!!
Sweden has a medical system like Australia. It is mixed providers (gov and private) but single payer. Sweden has private providers too. Uk has single payer and provider. That is a problem.
The goth refernece was good. I was an emo. I was maligned outside my social group but inside i was very popular and accepted.
As a Libertarian, I wrestle with this. Morally, I think it's reprehensible to allow children to chemically transition. With that being said, I don't think it's the government's place to say yes or no. Like abortion or drugs or anything else illegal, all they would be doing is creating an even scarier/ more dangerous black market.
I see it as a parental rights issue. Meaning it should be something that the parents and minor are in full agreement on. Allow a psychiatrist to sign off on it making sure that the minor isn't being coerced. I agree we give the government way too much power. Neither side sees the unintented consequences of their positions.
@@Justin_Beaver564 Only to the extent that their decisions don't affect other people in society. If this is a personal rights issue then insurance companies should also be allowed to deny coverage to people that elect to subject themselves to elective experimental treatments. Taxpayers shouldn't be on the hook for social and medical services that may be required if harm results from these treatments. Society shouldn't have to accommodate such extreme body modifications. The trans population already suffers from higher rates of poverty and allowing children to opt into lifelong medical maintenance is an unreasonable burden on society.
@@adw802 I completely agree. That's why I'm a libertarian, not a progressive.
Tune in next week for our objective discussion on prefrontal lobotomies or as the AP style guide refers to them medically necessary and justified personality interventions.
off topic but if this is you i’m here because i see your car often 😅
Katie keeps trying to mute Jesse.
Many doctors have shown no concern for how antidepressants affect sexual function in adolescents but I don’t see a moral panic about that. Not saying puberty blockers are automatically good for trans teens. Just find it interesting what many people are and are not freaking out about.
Another thing to note is so-called puberty blockers have been in medical use since at least the 1980s and used for various medical conditions in children, adolescents, and adults. And they are NOT used solely in transgender cases. In fact some children are temporarily put on these medications if they are entering puberty way too early.
Transgender issues are complex and complicated. And many things in medical treatment are very challenging to gather quality information on, especially when gathering data from a small minority population that has been and is currently under threat of discrimination and worse.
It’s quite a mine field. And I agree it’s very very difficult to determine what medical and psychological treatments are best and safest for children. And I agree the ethical and consent questions around adolescents taking medications is very difficult. But I don’t think it automatically means any one medication should across the board be off the table. Especially when a medication(s) have been studied in a larger population than just transgender teens.
And yes I’m highly concerned by the idea of doctors pressuring parents to put their kids on meds bc they tell them their child could die by suicide otherwise. But to bring it full circle, what about when doctors recommend antidepressants for teens because of concerns over further deteriorating mental health? Should that not be discussed either?
Again it’s a really messy, complex issue. But maybe, just maybe, doctors aren’t as fully in the dark or divorced from reality as some are painting the picture of.
I would recommend you actually read the Cass Report, and Hannah Barnes' book about the Tavistock, Time To Think. It's not just that the evidence was weak. It's that the clinic actively avoided collecting data or seriously discussing the long-term effects of PBs and cross sex hormones. The first whistleblower there was in 2004. She was forced out. Her husband then tried to blow the whistle too. He was forced out. Then the Safeguarding Officer was forced out for raising safeguarding concerns. Several gay clinicians expressed serious concern about homophobic parents pushing (proto-)gay children towards transition and were ignored.
All of this is worse in countries with privatised medicine. This really is one of the worst medical scandals of all time. The depth of evil amongst doctors doing these kinds of interventions is unfathomable.
No. Next question.
Please try to not beclown yourself with the next one.
Nope.
C
Zach says maybe we don't need to limit body modification for adults" but I'm sure he'd agree that the government shouldn't be paying for it.
There is a detransitioner in the UK who is suing the NHS because he presented with diagnosed OCD, autism, and expressed internalized homophobia. These symptoms were sidelined in favor of fast-tracking him towards transition.
An overwhelming number of adults with gender dysphoria also have mental health comorbidities (some studies place the number as high as 80%) so there is a case to be made that doctors still have a duty to address these mental health issues before proceeding to medical transition.
In answer to your question in the title.
“No!”
The answer is NO. Even thinking this might be a good idea is beyond stupid.
There is absolute privilege in parliment in all anglo commonwealth countries against any libel or defamatory statements. You cannot be sued as a parliamentarian for a statement said in parliment.
I’ll save you an hour and a half. The answer’s no.
We are a sex not a gender!! Stop conflating words!!
I'm glad you're talking about this reason. Malfeasance in "the science" should be a libertarian talking point in this regard and others...
This is worst named show on YT
"word of mouth"
Save the trans kids of Gaza!!!!
Should Gazans have hospitals?
No.
Next question.
NOOO
*NO!!!*
No
There's no such thing as 'transitioning'
No.
Noooooooo leave kids alone
Lack of coverage can be a form of information control. Which is one of the 4 control methods that characterize a high-control group.
90 minutes on this when the answer is simply "No."
Just here to say no, because its impossible, and to unsubscribe from this lunacy.
Really good discussion. Thank you for discussion some of the history 20:53 which helps explain where activism is coming from. Perhaps the pendulum swung too far? But bans to puberty blockers are not the solution. More evidence and support and caution to be sure.
The challenge lay in that puberty is precisely the time when gender dysphoria will worsen. Puberty blockers - while there are a lot of unknown answers about long-term impact - are used as a way to give these kids time to make a decision. They can be discontinued and a natal (birth) puberty continues.
The other option is not providing puberty blockers, which would force a lot of trans kids to go through a puberty that is wrong for them. Developing secondary sex characteristics that are disturbing to them (breasts for men, facial hair and a masculine face for women) which later require surgical correction which could otherwise be prevented.
Puberty blockers can also help trans people pass as cis women and men later in life, as they never develop these unwanted secondary sex characteristics. This can lead to healthier and happier lives, better outcomes for them and society.
Do some people regret taking puberty blockers? Yes. But they can be discontinued and a natural puberty restarted. Starting cross gender hormones - which are not reversible - should be done much more cautiously and never given until clear consent is able to be given, accordingly.
30:13 and yeah, there definitely is an aspect of social contagion - which underscores the need for funding and support and time, not bans. Better care. Not automatic prescriptions but also banning treatments is problematic.
There’s a lot of cis-bodied younger Gen-Y and alpha kids who ID as non-binary - but don’t necessarily require traditional gender medical transition. But still, for some, it’s crucial.
I don’t think it’s terrible to ask questions and delve into this, but please Jesse, don’t deny presumption of competence to a 14 year old because they’re autistic.
Autistics who identify as LGBTQ at much higher rates are lower support needs and are every bit as mentally competent as allistic (non-autistic) teens. One of our greatest struggles among lower support needs autistic people (so-called “high functioning”) is denial of presumption of competence which often subjects us to the discrimination of low expectations.
I think it’s valid to ask questions about any medical treatment being used on minors. It’s just that autistic kids are actually LESS likely to succumb to peer pressure, but more likely to be open about being neuroqueer. TMI is a fairly universal trait of neurodivergents. Part of my social awkwardness as an autistic person my whole life is struggle to edit my thoughts, a struggle to edit what I blurt out as not to wound the normies.
Liz: You ask how did we get to this place of data suppression? Sounds like COVID EH?
Criminal to do this to children
no i never transistored
No, freak shows are closed so they won’t have a future
Absolutely all kids should transition .. just so that both they and their parents know what will happen when it happens. omg
Regarding the Lisa littman 2018 paper on Rapid Onset Gender Dusphoria One only has to read how the data was collected.
It was a survey of parents, not the children and the parents were culled from, and I will be gracious, a not-so-friendly transgender forum.
This doesn’t negate the data from the NHS which shows the same trends as the Lisa Littman paper (they literally showed this data on screen in this interview). A shocking 4,000% increase in the number of girls suddenly identifying as trans.
This doesn’t negate the data from the NHS which shows the same increase in girls identifying as trans (they literally showed the data on screen in this interview). A shocking 4,000% increase in the number of girls identifying as trans over the last 10 years.
This doesn’t negate the data from the NHS which shows the same increase in girls identifying as trans (they literally showed the data on screen in this interview). A shocking 4,000% increase in the number of girls identifying as trans over the last 10 years.
This doesn’t negate the data from the NHS which shows the same increase in girls identifying as trans (they literally showed the data on screen in this interview). A shocking 4000 percent increase in the number of girls over the last 10 years.
Wasting time on topics like this while the empire is burning is quickly taking this channel to irrelevance.
It's the new anorexia/bulimia epidemic from the 80s
"Just asking questions" is a huge dog whistle. Stay clear of this.
If your answer is NO then we shouldn't be charging children as adults in court, we shouldn't be allowing them to take out students loans for college or treated them as adults in any other manner either but we already do. Unlike kids who break the law or take a loan, this topic affects less than 1 percent of the population.
Juveniles being charged as adults is exceptionally rare, you can’t take out a loan unless you’re either 18 or have a co-signer, and you can’t do most adult activities unless you’re 18 or 21.
... In order to get bottoms surgery you must be 18... so not really much to argue about. Also a hair cut would be "gender affirming care"... so this whole created focus is just unnecessary...
@whatap-reason_tv_page ? No thanks. Not interested in arguing. (It just wastes time.) I've said my piece. #Namaste
You have to do medically transition _before_ they reach puberty. Because if you don’t, then you won’t visibly pass as the opposite gender you choose.
This is extremely important.
You have to do the icepick lobotomy BEFORE they reach adolescence, otherwise they might choose not to once they are adults with full mental faculty.
Or you could just not ruin the child's life before they have any idea of what these drugs have done to them.
@@Muonium1 Your comment makes no sense. The fact that it got 3 upvotes so far is incredibly sus…..
@@microsoftpain Re-read my OP. You misread it
You won't visibly pass ever.
Alright. I'm out. This conversation actually needs a trans person in it to get some real perspective. Otherwise you're just speculating about other people, and their decisions.
Gender affirming surgeries have very low regret rates, lower than many other uncontroversial surgeries eg. knee surgery . There's plenty of evidence in the psychological another medical communities of the physical and mental benefits of providing gender affirming care to kids who want it. puberty blockers are safe, they're used on cisgendered kids as well as transgender kids.
Comment section is full of supposed Libertarians who want to use the government's Monopoly of violence to block others from receiving Healthcare.
yes. it depends on the child
The comment field here is the lowest of the absolute lowest humanity has to offer... And that was the sole purpose of this video.
I remember when Reason was strongly pro-LGBT. The fucking alt-right fakertarian take over of Reason is starting to complete.