Dr. Littman, please keep your research and interest in this very important topic going... the world needs you to stay persistent and be our voice with the outrage we are all experiencing in witnessing ROGD. Thank you!
At (9:32) in the Reasons for Transition table, the Natal Male column seems to have a formatting problem where the "%" sign associated with each numeric value appears on the next row of the table causing much of the data in that column to be unreadable. At (11:02) in the Social Influences table the same kind of formatting problem causes two digit numbers to appear as one digit numbers on two rows (so a 48% response would appear as '4' on the first row, and '8' on the second row). The problem is most likely that the column width is set to narrow (would be my best guess) These slides need to be fixed as the numbers as presented are misleading and some of the data is/are missing from the slide.
Also, your Trans / Detrans studies need to be 10 years, not 5 years, because between the time it takes to transition, and the time it takes to get over the "honeymoon period", 5 years will have already been used up. This will limit how much data you can gather about detransitioners.
@@randmorf Yeah but the phenomenon is a little bit too new for that, I don't think it's been 10 years yet that these Rogd kids have existed in large enough numbers
Don't let them make gender dysphorics into a Jello block! There are tremendous differences in the dysphoric cohorts; GAC ignored these in favour of blanket statements, reducing the many variants of trans into a homogeneous Jello block with one single treatment path. This view is extremely harmful to many individuals grouped within the block, as evidenced by the rising number of post-hormonal/post-surgical detransitioners.
It looks like a delay in personal development here with the ROGD cohort. the kind explained by Jean Twenge in her book Igen. It would be interesting to hear her perspective on this.
Which study proves that gender "affirmation" surgery lowers the trans suicidality rate? Remember, most of have know the details of most of the popular studies so don't just quickly Google one and BS it here. Name a study that you've personally read through and understand that truly proves it.
It's a fact that 80 or 90 percent or more of children who say they want to be the other sex stop saying this after puberty . If they are transitioned with hormones and surgery they become lifetime medical patients with reduced or no sexual function. It's obvious that it's wrong to encourage them to transition .
Your point should be levelled against the entire trans self-report research. My question: Do schools that socially transistion a child contribute to the 94% likelihood that the child will adopt a trangender path? I am sure you know social transition is the first step of a healthcare intervention, it can be as simple as a child changing pronouns and name. This is the start of gender affirming care. The impact of this intervention was reported in Pediatrics, the journal of the American Academy of Pediatrics. The article entitled, “Gender Identity 5 Years After Social Transition” was published 13 July 2022, and it was based on a study that started with 319 children. The average age of subjects when they joined the study was 8 years old. The result is simply this: after five years 94% of the children continue to persist in their transgender identity. What this means is there is now a large number of the subjects in this study that have already moved on to medicalization - the next stage in the protocol - and this involves using puberty blocking drugs and then cross sex hormones. The researchers expect the children who have not reached puberty, and continue to identify as transgender, to eventually follow in this medicalization path.
This issue is so unlooked for, the clinical professionals have to take the lead in order to prevent any further damage in the younger population
Dr. Littman, please keep your research and interest in this very important topic going... the world needs you to stay persistent and be our voice with the outrage we are all experiencing in witnessing ROGD. Thank you!
Dr Littman, you haven’t mentioned anything about the relationship between autism and ROGD. I would like to hear your thoughts on this please.
At (9:32) in the Reasons for Transition table, the Natal Male column seems to have a formatting problem where the "%" sign associated with each numeric value appears on the next row of the table causing much of the data in that column to be unreadable. At (11:02) in the Social Influences table the same kind of formatting problem causes two digit numbers to appear as one digit numbers on two rows (so a 48% response would appear as '4' on the first row, and '8' on the second row). The problem is most likely that the column width is set to narrow (would be my best guess) These slides need to be fixed as the numbers as presented are misleading and some of the data is/are missing from the slide.
Also, your Trans / Detrans studies need to be 10 years, not 5 years, because between the time it takes to transition, and the time it takes to get over the "honeymoon period", 5 years will have already been used up. This will limit how much data you can gather about detransitioners.
Yeah but it hasn't been 10 years yet it's the problem, it's only been A little bit over 5 years, that's how new this phenomenon is@@randmorf
@@randmorf Yeah but the phenomenon is a little bit too new for that, I don't think it's been 10 years yet that these Rogd kids have existed in large enough numbers
Their article was only done in 2018, so 10 years would be 2028
Don't let them make gender dysphorics into a Jello block! There are tremendous differences in the dysphoric cohorts; GAC ignored these in favour of blanket statements, reducing the many variants of trans into a homogeneous Jello block with one single treatment path. This view is extremely harmful to many individuals grouped within the block, as evidenced by the rising number of post-hormonal/post-surgical detransitioners.
It looks like a delay in personal development here with the ROGD cohort. the kind explained by Jean Twenge in her book Igen. It would be interesting to hear her perspective on this.
Great intro
Still, that's is no evidence that ROGD is real. It's nothing more than a hypothesis at this point.
And also the whole gender identity ideology is nothing more than a hypothesis.
First do no harm
Follow the science
@@jonnash5196 Gender-affirming care is based on evidence, ROGDism on two online surveys. That's the difference.
Which study proves that gender "affirmation" surgery lowers the trans suicidality rate? Remember, most of have know the details of most of the popular studies so don't just quickly Google one and BS it here. Name a study that you've personally read through and understand that truly proves it.
It's a fact that 80 or 90 percent or more of children who say they want to be the other sex stop saying this after puberty . If they are transitioned with hormones and surgery they become lifetime medical patients with reduced or no sexual function. It's obvious that it's wrong to encourage them to transition .
Your point should be levelled against the entire trans self-report research. My question: Do schools that socially transistion a child contribute to the 94% likelihood that the child will adopt a trangender path? I am sure you know social transition is the first step of a healthcare intervention, it can be as simple as a child changing pronouns and name. This is the start of gender affirming care. The impact of this intervention was reported in Pediatrics, the journal of the American Academy of Pediatrics. The article entitled, “Gender Identity 5 Years After Social Transition” was published 13 July 2022, and it was based on a study that started with 319 children. The average age of subjects when they joined the study was 8 years old. The result is simply this: after five years 94% of the children continue to persist in their transgender identity. What this means is there is now a large number of the subjects in this study that have already moved on to medicalization - the next stage in the protocol - and this involves using puberty blocking drugs and then cross sex hormones. The researchers expect the children who have not reached puberty, and continue to identify as transgender, to eventually follow in this medicalization path.