Any time someone can CHOOSE to avoid medicalization, they should. Birth control is not the same as puberty blockers. Leave menopausal women alone, they've deal with enough. Bringing up abortion is a ridiculous whataboutism.
An adult woman has to jump through a ton of hoops and experiences major push back to get tubes tied or a hysterectomy, even if there are documented health problems or concerns, but it’s okay for kids to have these surgeries that affect their reproduction?? Totally crazy. I had to have a hysterectomy after I had my twins because my uterus fused to my bladder and died and even then it took a lot to get that surgery even though my life was at risk because of there was the off chance my uterus could be saved… it couldn’t and I was getting so sick. I also tried several times to get a hysterectomy prior to pregnancy because of excessive bleeding and other uterus problems, but was denied. These surgeries done so casually for kids is truly terrifying considering the push back they give to adults. But this was before gender ideology really took hold, maybe it’s different now.
Yup, when it comes the realm of female reproductive care, it is extremely challenging every step of the way. And hormone therapy is no cake walk for menopausal women like trans activists claim. The medical industry does not care about women. They do care about medicalizing children though because a young trans person is a major cash cow. No one wants to hear your female whining! 🙄
Hi from Finland. We do not give blockers nor hrt to underage kids. Our national research was done before the Cass report, but our conclusions were the same. And our country is very liberal on american standards. There is no medical bases for transitioning kids is the consensus here.
In the WPATH SOC8 (standards of care 8), there's an entire chapter describing "eunuch identity". So, the argument is that a boy can be born knowing that he wants to be castrated. There are also annotations that direct readers to websites containing depraved sexual material related to children. This is the world's foremost "medical" association for transgender healthcare. Edit: this comment is more interesting than the one I left before XD
Yup, the WPATH’s endorsement of “eunuch identity” as a valid “authentic wish of competency” is a reductio argument against the entire body autonomy argument for children.
These people are constantly talking about how they’re the most marginalized people in the world, but apparently if anyone else says that, they’re transphobic? No one wants their child to have an unnecessarily difficult time in life.
I think there was only one video I noticed when it was attacking cass review and so far the only thing it really attack the review on was the idea that all forms of research have to go off by "double blind study standard." Which the trans person pointed out that a double blind study would be nearly impossible to do on the use of hormones or even puberty blockers. And I say the fact that they try to make this a standard on something that would be ineffective on. I wouldn't say it completely disproves the review, but it does hurt it's claim.
How are we allowing via the cass review, medicinal hormonal "treatments" which we know result in the sterilization and arrested physical and brain development of a child, for a psychological condition, under the guise of "research"?
@@tonyhoffman3309 I never really said I had much of a problem with the cass review, just that only thing I point out is that you can't really have double blind studies done on the effects of hormones or puberty blockers, and there really isn't anything advance enough technology wise which would allow us to just say "those kids are real trans kids, and those aren't actually trans kids." I say its one of those issues where parents should have full decisions and if you have your child come to you questioning dysphoria it should be something that the parent should handle carefully.
@@defennia In about 30 seconds, I was able to find audio-visual evidence of Dr. Cass stating clearly that double-blind studies are impossible for this and many other medical trials (she cited acupuncture as an example), on the basis that it would quickly become "obvious" what treatment one was getting, and called the claim that she used that standard for the review "completely incorrect." So is it a "fact" or a ""fact""? Sounds like an excuse to reject the review, based on something someone just made-up. And to believe that, I'd first have to believe a respected doctor is somehow completely oblivious to the obvious with no other evidence and in contradiction to what they actually say.
I have to wonder if the parents that allowed their kids to transition will ever look back and decide they shouldn’t have. Having a trans identifying kid has aged me 10-15 years in four. All the gaslighting by everyone is unlike anything you could imagine. Friends, family, clinicians, mental health professionals, strangers on the internet… I felt like I was in the twilight zone. I’ve somewhat given up on trying to change her mind, but I am proud I stood firm about medical interventions. Protecting our children is what we are supposed to do. Even if you don’t have children of your own, a “paternalistic” view is what any rational society WOULD have in regards to children. Thank you for discussing this- I saw the paper on X but didn’t make it past the second page 😓 I feel like our world is so lost.
I tend to fall into the line of thought where its something that has to be agreed on by both parents and child who is within the age 14 or older in which you would have to have an agreement between both parents and child in question before any decision could be made on the used of hormones or blockers. I do think parents have the final say on how to handle the health of their own child.
@@defennia I would agree with you. A very personal and individualized decision. Not that long ago, a few states had gotten to the point of removing the child from the home if parents were not allowing transition (California and Washington that I recall) while others would take the kid away if parents did allow transitioning (Texas and now others). My thing is the family unit should be honored- don’t give some random social worker the right to take a child away from their family over a difference in beliefs.
A recent german study showed that over 63% of transidentifying kids desist. And for teenaged biological females the figures are over 70%. Parents should stay firm on the medical intervention and just try to keep channels of communication open.
I always wonder what happened to "you don't have to transition to be trans" argument when every child with gender dysphoria must be transitioned. There are plently of trans people who choose not to transition for whatever reason. Health reasons, they want to breastfeed or have children etc. So even if you knew a child was trans for certain, there is still doubt that they would want to transition that young or interrupt their puberty. I'm so glad I went through a normal puberty and transitioned as an adult.
It’s also important to point out the risks associated with pregnancy that aren’t medical. Murder is the #1 cause of death of pregnant women, and it has been for at least a century. The most likely time for you to be murdered by your spouse is when you’re pregnant with his child. This is still true for women who have no instances of prior victimization by the spouse.
Oooohh myyy gooood what I we even arguing about anymore? That children and teenagers should be allowed to do whatever the hell they wish and not do what they don't wanna?? NO ONE wants to get through puberty. Tough shit, no one wants to get older either, you can't opt out of biology, tho. What the hell is this article's point even? That the review about medicine was based on medicine instead of feelings? Christ!
I feel like "tough shit" is what any rebuttal to trans activist arguments (read: whining) boils down to. Get over yourselves, life isnt fair, no one owes you jack, etc.
You fundamentally don't understand the trans experience Your discomfort with puberty is not at all similar to the discomfort trans people feel from going through the wrong puberty. It's not a discomfort with the awkwardness and change that comes from puberty, but in the case of MtFs, with the changes specifically resulting from testosterone. We wouldn't forcibly inject testosterone into some teenage girl, but this is the experience that I had as an MtF, watching my body become something it shouldn't be, become someone else's body, and knowing that developing like the girls would just feel comfortable and normal, perhaps also with the usual discomfort and awkwardness that comes with puberty You say "you can't opt out of biology", but I could have just been given the correct hormones to go through the correct puberty
@@Brookelium there is no such thing as "wrong puberty", it's just puberty and you have to go through it to live a healthy life. Stating otherwise is a religious believe and is not taken into account when we are talking about biology.
@@Xenono54 If there's no such thing as "wrong puberty", then there's nothing wrong with taking hormones (this is just the other puberty) 😆 Indeed, you should go through the (correct) puberty to live a healthy life. It's unhealthy to be made to live in the wrong body. Whether you realize it or not, you're always transitioning in one direction or the other, so why should I be forcibly transitioned in the wrong direction, when I don't consent to it?
for no reason, and yes, this includes circ. It is not medically necessary in majority of cases and I wish Americans can get to this point and leave their sons natural like they do in my native country.
Not only would these people not be therapists, they shouldn't have children in their custody without supervision from Social Services. If I sound extreme, just remember they want to let children cut off their healthy body parts. This is something we can't allow ourselves to be desensitised to by exposure/ normalisation in our culture. It's the most extreme laissez-faire attitude to anything I can imagine and indicates they're not competent to perform a safeguarding role. It also reminds me of hyperliberal attitudes to paedophilia where the child 'consents'. On that note, actually, can I just draw a link between my above observation and the paedophilic tendencies recently exposed by the WPATH files? I don't have the evidence to show these two things are connected, but I'm damn sure suspicious about the patterns I'm seeing.
I totally agree with you, and find it frightening that there are doctors out there who would prescribe medicine based on what the patient wants, over what they actually need. There was an agree/disagree debate with Peter Boghossian where a biologist and a doctoral student were “debating.” The biologist was transition doesn’t exist because biology always wins, it is about facts. And the future doctor was saying she would give any medicine to people if they asked for it, even if it wasn’t what their body needed, because her goal as a doctor was to “make people happy.” And giving them what they want is going to make them happy. People like that shouldn’t be allowed to graduate, it’s scary and perverse.
@raina4732 That doctor should not be given a license. I'm a healthcare professional myself, and it has never been our role to 'make people happy'. We factor in person-centredness into clinical decision making, but it's not a religious doctrine. We have to weigh it against our safeguarding role, too. Also, that woman sounds too dumb to be a doctor, if she hasn't worked out that 1) Short term happiness can come at the expense of long term anguish (not least in patients with mental health conditions who have a penectomy, feel europhoric, then come down from their psychosis and suddenly have to contemplate life without their penis and 2) If you give people whatever they want, you're doing yourself out of a livelihood. There's no point in having a doctor if the patient can self-prescribe.
So the reported high numbers of detransition within 5 years, mean nothing to these people. Going through puberty is a human right. It is prefable to take the path that doesn't involve damage to a healthy body. That doesn't make anyone have less value than anybody else.
Going through the correct puberty should be a human right. Having testosterone forced on me as a trans woman is what did damage to my healthy body. Taking female hormones hasn't damaged me, and has made my body more like how it's supposed to be
@@liberality Are you contesting that it was forced on me? What do you call it when something is done to you against your will? Playing word games doesn't win you any points, and is merely a tactic to distract from the actual discussion, perhaps because you don't like the conclusion it leads to
Hi Ray, I wrote a related article for the Genspect site in April, Are “Life Goals” Anything to Do with Health Services? Let me know if you're up for a collab some time. The paradox is that on the one hand they want no gatekeeping from the medical profession, on the other hand they want state or health insurance funding for issues they say are non-psychiatric. It's my view that this funding without an illness represents an emerging 'trans privilege' which other groups in society don't enjoy. Not that it does people much good in the end, so that privilege may be both blessing and curse.
Thanks for the heads up! I will check out your article! And yes, the paradox you’ve identified is central to the philosophical contradiction of gender medicine and needs to be discussed more.
The argument they use is that things like birth control are covered for women, and finasteride for hair loss is covered for men. I understand birth control being covered, because the risk of an unwanted pregnancy far outweighs the cost of birth control. However, I do think their point about finasteride stands-it’s cosmetic and mainly provided so men with hair loss can feel better about themselves. Just something to consider if you continue writing on this.
@@StormBringer5 Thanks for your comment. I agree that health services have overlapped with cosmetic services where a patient can make the case that cosmetic intervention can improve their psychological well-being. What is actually funded depends on the specific health care system, of course. The difference between this and so-called 'gender-affirming care' is that having baldness treated, for example, shouldn't cause infertility or life-long complications. While it may be ethical to treat baldness in order to improve psychological functioning, the balance is much less clear when using radical treatments.
Ray, I am so glad you abandoned your Rachel persona and crossed over to the side of reality & reason. Watching & looking forward to your daily YT posts have become bright spots in my daily routine.
The labelling game (declaring an individual or idea "anti-______" or "______phobic" or "______-supremacist") are all examples of othering. It is a form of black and white thinking which is used by activists as a way to avoid having to confront arguments which are contrary to the narrative. If they can make such a label stick, that person or idea is designated as something which can be dismissed out of turn. After all, you wouldn't listen to anything a Nazi says, right? (It's no coincidence those who habitually apply the (anti-, -phobe, etc...) labels often apply the Nazi label to the same people, too.)
I like how we have to have detrans people having to speak about this so people can understand. This is common sense. If you really believe a child can understand their cosmetic change, you're not that smart of a person.
The idea of an authentic self presumably needs unpicking here. For example, there has been a massive increase in the number of children, more often than not girls, with ‘gender dysphoria’, or at least somehow identifying as trans gender. But unlike in the past, where there were a handful of such children, normally boys, who were like this from a young age, most of the kids these days are of the ‘rapid onset gender dysphoria’ type ie it only develops later on in childhood. And when it develops there are perfectly plausible arguments that this is a kind of social contagion etc. In what sense are children like this, who have not displayed a stable dysphoria since really early childhood, and who likely picked up the idea from their peers and the internet, displaying an authentic or ‘natural, or innate self that needs expressing through medics, intervention? Is it wise to allow such children to get their short term, here and now, wishes, when the medicalisation route contains many potential harmful outcomes? It’s difficult to come to the conclusion that the authors of this section of the report are really putting child welfare first: it looks more like ideology and the personal psychology of some of the authors is what motivates their analysis here.
Any time someone can CHOOSE to avoid medicalization, they should. Birth control is not the same as puberty blockers. Leave menopausal women alone, they've deal with enough. Bringing up abortion is a ridiculous whataboutism.
Even birth control is a huge risk!
An adult woman has to jump through a ton of hoops and experiences major push back to get tubes tied or a hysterectomy, even if there are documented health problems or concerns, but it’s okay for kids to have these surgeries that affect their reproduction?? Totally crazy. I had to have a hysterectomy after I had my twins because my uterus fused to my bladder and died and even then it took a lot to get that surgery even though my life was at risk because of there was the off chance my uterus could be saved… it couldn’t and I was getting so sick. I also tried several times to get a hysterectomy prior to pregnancy because of excessive bleeding and other uterus problems, but was denied. These surgeries done so casually for kids is truly terrifying considering the push back they give to adults. But this was before gender ideology really took hold, maybe it’s different now.
Yup, when it comes the realm of female reproductive care, it is extremely challenging every step of the way. And hormone therapy is no cake walk for menopausal women like trans activists claim. The medical industry does not care about women. They do care about medicalizing children though because a young trans person is a major cash cow. No one wants to hear your female whining! 🙄
Hi from Finland. We do not give blockers nor hrt to underage kids. Our national research was done before the Cass report, but our conclusions were the same. And our country is very liberal on american standards. There is no medical bases for transitioning kids is the consensus here.
Yep, absolutely!
In the WPATH SOC8 (standards of care 8), there's an entire chapter describing "eunuch identity".
So, the argument is that a boy can be born knowing that he wants to be castrated. There are also annotations that direct readers to websites containing depraved sexual material related to children. This is the world's foremost "medical" association for transgender healthcare.
Edit: this comment is more interesting than the one I left before XD
Yup, the WPATH’s endorsement of “eunuch identity” as a valid “authentic wish of competency” is a reductio argument against the entire body autonomy argument for children.
@@RayAlexWilliams Unless your goal is to sterilise as many unusual people as possible.
It’s so crazy to realize that boys are born with a level of bodily autonomy that no female human will ever get to experience.
These people are constantly talking about how they’re the most marginalized people in the world, but apparently if anyone else says that, they’re transphobic? No one wants their child to have an unnecessarily difficult time in life.
I can’t believe that this is some form of official counter to the Cass Review. Great debunking. Your debunks need to be seen by everyone imo
I think there was only one video I noticed when it was attacking cass review and so far the only thing it really attack the review on was the idea that all forms of research have to go off by "double blind study standard." Which the trans person pointed out that a double blind study would be nearly impossible to do on the use of hormones or even puberty blockers. And I say the fact that they try to make this a standard on something that would be ineffective on.
I wouldn't say it completely disproves the review, but it does hurt it's claim.
How are we allowing via the cass review, medicinal hormonal "treatments" which we know result in the sterilization and arrested physical and brain development of a child, for a psychological condition, under the guise of "research"?
@@tonyhoffman3309 I never really said I had much of a problem with the cass review, just that only thing I point out is that you can't really have double blind studies done on the effects of hormones or puberty blockers, and there really isn't anything advance enough technology wise which would allow us to just say "those kids are real trans kids, and those aren't actually trans kids."
I say its one of those issues where parents should have full decisions and if you have your child come to you questioning dysphoria it should be something that the parent should handle carefully.
@@defennia In about 30 seconds, I was able to find audio-visual evidence of Dr. Cass stating clearly that double-blind studies are impossible for this and many other medical trials (she cited acupuncture as an example), on the basis that it would quickly become "obvious" what treatment one was getting, and called the claim that she used that standard for the review "completely incorrect."
So is it a "fact" or a ""fact""? Sounds like an excuse to reject the review, based on something someone just made-up. And to believe that, I'd first have to believe a respected doctor is somehow completely oblivious to the obvious with no other evidence and in contradiction to what they actually say.
They have changed the term "parental" for "paternal" to give parenting a negative connotation.
Thank you for your competent and comprehensive analysis of the paper and for your patience while explaining the obvious.
You’re very welcome!
I have to wonder if the parents that allowed their kids to transition will ever look back and decide they shouldn’t have. Having a trans identifying kid has aged me 10-15 years in four. All the gaslighting by everyone is unlike anything you could imagine. Friends, family, clinicians, mental health professionals, strangers on the internet… I felt like I was in the twilight zone. I’ve somewhat given up on trying to change her mind, but I am proud I stood firm about medical interventions. Protecting our children is what we are supposed to do. Even if you don’t have children of your own, a “paternalistic” view is what any rational society WOULD have in regards to children.
Thank you for discussing this- I saw the paper on X but didn’t make it past the second page 😓 I feel like our world is so lost.
I tend to fall into the line of thought where its something that has to be agreed on by both parents and child who is within the age 14 or older in which you would have to have an agreement between both parents and child in question before any decision could be made on the used of hormones or blockers. I do think parents have the final say on how to handle the health of their own child.
@@defennia I would agree with you. A very personal and individualized decision. Not that long ago, a few states had gotten to the point of removing the child from the home if parents were not allowing transition (California and Washington that I recall) while others would take the kid away if parents did allow transitioning (Texas and now others). My thing is the family unit should be honored- don’t give some random social worker the right to take a child away from their family over a difference in beliefs.
💕
A recent german study showed that over 63% of transidentifying kids desist. And for teenaged biological females the figures are over 70%. Parents should stay firm on the medical intervention and just try to keep channels of communication open.
@@upnorth2421 I agree
I always wonder what happened to "you don't have to transition to be trans" argument when every child with gender dysphoria must be transitioned. There are plently of trans people who choose not to transition for whatever reason. Health reasons, they want to breastfeed or have children etc. So even if you knew a child was trans for certain, there is still doubt that they would want to transition that young or interrupt their puberty. I'm so glad I went through a normal puberty and transitioned as an adult.
It’s also important to point out the risks associated with pregnancy that aren’t medical. Murder is the #1 cause of death of pregnant women, and it has been for at least a century. The most likely time for you to be murdered by your spouse is when you’re pregnant with his child. This is still true for women who have no instances of prior victimization by the spouse.
Oooohh myyy gooood what I we even arguing about anymore? That children and teenagers should be allowed to do whatever the hell they wish and not do what they don't wanna??
NO ONE wants to get through puberty. Tough shit, no one wants to get older either, you can't opt out of biology, tho.
What the hell is this article's point even? That the review about medicine was based on medicine instead of feelings? Christ!
I feel like "tough shit" is what any rebuttal to trans activist arguments (read: whining) boils down to. Get over yourselves, life isnt fair, no one owes you jack, etc.
You fundamentally don't understand the trans experience
Your discomfort with puberty is not at all similar to the discomfort trans people feel from going through the wrong puberty. It's not a discomfort with the awkwardness and change that comes from puberty, but in the case of MtFs, with the changes specifically resulting from testosterone. We wouldn't forcibly inject testosterone into some teenage girl, but this is the experience that I had as an MtF, watching my body become something it shouldn't be, become someone else's body, and knowing that developing like the girls would just feel comfortable and normal, perhaps also with the usual discomfort and awkwardness that comes with puberty
You say "you can't opt out of biology", but I could have just been given the correct hormones to go through the correct puberty
@@Brookelium clearly doesnt help yall especially with the after transisional suicide rates ._.
@@Brookelium there is no such thing as "wrong puberty", it's just puberty and you have to go through it to live a healthy life.
Stating otherwise is a religious believe and is not taken into account when we are talking about biology.
@@Xenono54 If there's no such thing as "wrong puberty", then there's nothing wrong with taking hormones (this is just the other puberty) 😆
Indeed, you should go through the (correct) puberty to live a healthy life. It's unhealthy to be made to live in the wrong body. Whether you realize it or not, you're always transitioning in one direction or the other, so why should I be forcibly transitioned in the wrong direction, when I don't consent to it?
Would love it, if people just left children alone and stop cutting or altering their genitals do no reason.
for no reason, and yes, this includes circ. It is not medically necessary in majority of cases and I wish Americans can get to this point and leave their sons natural like they do in my native country.
Not only would these people not be therapists, they shouldn't have children in their custody without supervision from Social Services.
If I sound extreme, just remember they want to let children cut off their healthy body parts. This is something we can't allow ourselves to be desensitised to by exposure/ normalisation in our culture. It's the most extreme laissez-faire attitude to anything I can imagine and indicates they're not competent to perform a safeguarding role. It also reminds me of hyperliberal attitudes to paedophilia where the child 'consents'.
On that note, actually, can I just draw a link between my above observation and the paedophilic tendencies recently exposed by the WPATH files? I don't have the evidence to show these two things are connected, but I'm damn sure suspicious about the patterns I'm seeing.
I totally agree with you, and find it frightening that there are doctors out there who would prescribe medicine based on what the patient wants, over what they actually need. There was an agree/disagree debate with Peter Boghossian where a biologist and a doctoral student were “debating.” The biologist was transition doesn’t exist because biology always wins, it is about facts. And the future doctor was saying she would give any medicine to people if they asked for it, even if it wasn’t what their body needed, because her goal as a doctor was to “make people happy.” And giving them what they want is going to make them happy. People like that shouldn’t be allowed to graduate, it’s scary and perverse.
@raina4732 That doctor should not be given a license. I'm a healthcare professional myself, and it has never been our role to 'make people happy'. We factor in person-centredness into clinical decision making, but it's not a religious doctrine. We have to weigh it against our safeguarding role, too.
Also, that woman sounds too dumb to be a doctor, if she hasn't worked out that 1) Short term happiness can come at the expense of long term anguish (not least in patients with mental health conditions who have a penectomy, feel europhoric, then come down from their psychosis and suddenly have to contemplate life without their penis and 2) If you give people whatever they want, you're doing yourself out of a livelihood. There's no point in having a doctor if the patient can self-prescribe.
So the reported high numbers of detransition within 5 years, mean nothing to these people.
Going through puberty is a human right.
It is prefable to take the path that doesn't involve damage to a healthy body. That doesn't make anyone have less value than anybody else.
Going through the correct puberty should be a human right. Having testosterone forced on me as a trans woman is what did damage to my healthy body. Taking female hormones hasn't damaged me, and has made my body more like how it's supposed to be
@@Brookelium To think that your own body forced you to do anything sounds like alienation.
@@liberality This isn't a rebuttal
Yes, it was forced on me and I didn't consent to it
@@Brookelium Who was doing the forcing please?
@@liberality Are you contesting that it was forced on me?
What do you call it when something is done to you against your will? Playing word games doesn't win you any points, and is merely a tactic to distract from the actual discussion, perhaps because you don't like the conclusion it leads to
I really appreciate your videos. Your pursuit of truth as it unfolds before us is so helpful. Thank you!
Hi Ray, I wrote a related article for the Genspect site in April, Are “Life Goals” Anything to Do with Health Services? Let me know if you're up for a collab some time.
The paradox is that on the one hand they want no gatekeeping from the medical profession, on the other hand they want state or health insurance funding for issues they say are non-psychiatric. It's my view that this funding without an illness represents an emerging 'trans privilege' which other groups in society don't enjoy. Not that it does people much good in the end, so that privilege may be both blessing and curse.
Thanks for the heads up! I will check out your article! And yes, the paradox you’ve identified is central to the philosophical contradiction of gender medicine and needs to be discussed more.
The argument they use is that things like birth control are covered for women, and finasteride for hair loss is covered for men.
I understand birth control being covered, because the risk of an unwanted pregnancy far outweighs the cost of birth control. However, I do think their point about finasteride stands-it’s cosmetic and mainly provided so men with hair loss can feel better about themselves.
Just something to consider if you continue writing on this.
@@StormBringer5 Thanks for your comment. I agree that health services have overlapped with cosmetic services where a patient can make the case that cosmetic intervention can improve their psychological well-being. What is actually funded depends on the specific health care system, of course.
The difference between this and so-called 'gender-affirming care' is that having baldness treated, for example, shouldn't cause infertility or life-long complications. While it may be ethical to treat baldness in order to improve psychological functioning, the balance is much less clear when using radical treatments.
Great discussion, Ray. I always enjoy hearing your perspective.
Thanks for listening
Excellent analogies & talking points!
Thank you kindly!
Ray, I am so glad you abandoned your Rachel persona and crossed over to the side of reality & reason. Watching & looking forward to your daily YT posts have become bright spots in my daily routine.
Aww thank you! I always appreciate your comments!
Maybe it can become his drag/crossdressing name for later. 😂
The labelling game (declaring an individual or idea "anti-______" or "______phobic" or "______-supremacist") are all examples of othering. It is a form of black and white thinking which is used by activists as a way to avoid having to confront arguments which are contrary to the narrative. If they can make such a label stick, that person or idea is designated as something which can be dismissed out of turn. After all, you wouldn't listen to anything a Nazi says, right?
(It's no coincidence those who habitually apply the (anti-, -phobe, etc...) labels often apply the Nazi label to the same people, too.)
I like how we have to have detrans people having to speak about this so people can understand. This is common sense. If you really believe a child can understand their cosmetic change, you're not that smart of a person.
Great analogies! I don’t understand how people don’t understand!!!
The idea of an authentic self presumably needs unpicking here. For example, there has been a massive increase in the number of children, more often than not girls, with ‘gender dysphoria’, or at least somehow identifying as trans gender. But unlike in the past, where there were a handful of such children, normally boys, who were like this from a young age, most of the kids these days are of the ‘rapid onset gender dysphoria’ type ie it only develops later on in childhood. And when it develops there are perfectly plausible arguments that this is a kind of social contagion etc. In what sense are children like this, who have not displayed a stable dysphoria since really early childhood, and who likely picked up the idea from their peers and the internet, displaying an authentic or ‘natural, or innate self that needs expressing through medics, intervention? Is it wise to allow such children to get their short term, here and now, wishes, when the medicalisation route contains many potential harmful outcomes?
It’s difficult to come to the conclusion that the authors of this section of the report are really putting child welfare first: it looks more like ideology and the personal psychology of some of the authors is what motivates their analysis here.