California AB 957 authorizes courts to take transgender kids away from parents.

[VoidCat]

That was part of my follow up questions I wish I could have been there to ask. Forewarning for anyone squeamish. But trans women who transition sometimes loose the ability to ejaculate or sometimes even orgasm in the same way they did as a male but still have the ability to reach sexual satisfaction. So is it a situation like that or was it actually a sexual dysfunction issue? It wasn't clear.

Orgasms are different with trans men. So it's possible trans women still orgasm but not the same way they did as a male.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

That was part of my follow up questions I wish I could have been there to ask. Forewarning for anyone squeamish. But trans women who transition sometimes loose the ability to ejaculate or sometimes even orgasm in the same way they did as a male but still have the ability to reach sexual satisfaction. So is it a situation like that or was it actually a sexual dysfunction issue? It wasn't clear.

The loss of ejaculation and ability to achieve and maintain an errection was something that came as a relief for me.
Orgasm? I didn't lose it but from dysphoria more often than not I didn't have one even before starting hormones.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

Orgasms are different with trans men. So it's possible trans women still orgasm but not the same way they did as a male.

For me it's become more mental as physical stimulation alone just isn't going to do it.

 

[Friend of Mara]

Orgasms are different with trans men. So it's possible trans women still orgasm but not the same way they did as a male.

The loss of ejaculation and ability to achieve and maintain an errection was something that came as a relief for me.
Orgasm? I didn't lose it but from dysphoria more often than not I didn't have one even before starting hormones.

To both. That was more or less what I was leaning towards. So when they stated they couldn't have an orgasm it made me wonder what they meant by that. Under which criteria were they using.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

To both. That was more or less what I was leaning towards. So when they stated they couldn't have an orgasm it made me wonder what they meant by that. Under which criteria were they using.

A possibility of botttom surgery is loss of orgasm, but it's rare and from what I've gathered even more rare since I first read up into it years ago.

 

[Lucca la Croix]

I was openly transgender as a adult in my 20s, I did not recieve hormone therapy although my testosterone levels already fluctuated wildly. I honestly am unsure of the health effect of early hormones, my feeling is, it is their body, their choice. However...
The Trans topic was pushed heavily in media, and as a result alot of people assumed themselves trans, then later realized they were not, myself I realized I was non binary, and thankfully dident hit my system with hormones when I was considering it. For health reasons I simply am glad I did not. Although I am still more feminine in personality, my body eventually settled into being male.
It is a complex topic, that needs as much open dialoge as possible. Trans people do exist, and are likely more common than current estimates, non binary also.

 

[SomeRandom]

I was openly transgender as a adult in my 20s, I did not recieve hormone therapy although my testosterone levels already fluctuated wildly. I honestly am unsure of the health effect of early hormones, my feeling is, it is their body, their choice. However...
The Trans topic was pushed heavily in media, and as a result alot of people assumed themselves trans, then later realized they were not, myself I realized I was non binary, and thankfully dident hit my system with hormones when I was considering it. For health reasons I simply am glad I did not. Although I am still more feminine in personality, my body eventually settled into being male.
It is a complex topic, that needs as much open dialoge as possible. Trans people do exist, and are likely more common than current estimates, non binary also.

Hmm. Trans kids (for lack of a better term) seem to be among groups of overlapping “identities”
Again for lack of a better term.

Humans don’t always fit neatly into the current society decided “gender binary” if anything that system is both outdated and ironically in some places replaced older systems.
Hell not all humans even fit into a binary regarding the sexes. Chromosomes aren’t always neatly packaged, intersex/pseudohermaphroditism and hermaphroditism exists. They’re the ones getting surgery at very young ages, at birth even!

Like you say, it’s complex. Trans, non binary individuals, people who maybe don’t want to be either but not cis either. So our approach should always be extremely nuanced. Which I think is why some countries are seemingly pulling back a little (and maybe political pressure can factor into that.)
Maybe there were cases where the person detransitioned or found out their identity was something else. And we should cater for that as well.

Which is why I am more than happy to leave it in the hands of doctors and the pros lol
They can monitor, treat and back off when appropriate because they’re the ones who are studying and supervising this. Not me, not politicians, not law makers. Medical professionals. And I’ll just say, glad I ain’t one lol. Too much pressure

 

[icehorse]

The SECOND link is the one I will focus on. It is a full length study from 2013 and I did manage to get my grimy little hands on it as well as reviews of the study and I can hopefully elucidate why I disagree significantly with their conclusion and so should you.

I just want to be sure we're discussing the same paper. I'm looking at a paper titled: Factors Associated With Desistence and Persistence of Childhood Gender Dysphoria: A Quantitative Follow-up Study, by Steensma and others.

Is that the one you're talking about? If not, can you point me to the one you're talking about?

Thanks!

 

[Friend of Mara]

I just want to be sure we're discussing the same paper. I'm looking at a paper titled: Factors Associated With Desistence and Persistence of Childhood Gender Dysphoria: A Quantitative Follow-up Study, by Steensma and others.

Is that the one you're talking about? If not, can you point me to the one you're talking about?

Thanks!

Yes that one. And here is a direct link just to make sure we are talking about the same one.
2013 study

 

[Watchmen]

It shouldn't even be an option. Not in America.

So it’s ok for parents to abuse trans minors? Sick.

 

[Watchmen]

Do you all remember that most kids with gender dysphoria grow out of it as they go through puberty? (Most end up being gay.)

Irrelevant.

 

[icehorse]

The SECOND link is the one I will focus on. It is a full length study from 2013 and I did manage to get my grimy little hands on it as well as reviews of the study and I can hopefully elucidate why I disagree significantly with their conclusion and so should you.

First, for RFers who aren't reading these studies, there are two terms worth understanding:

"persisters" - those children who persisted in having GD after going through puberty and being reassessed.
"desisters" - those children who stopped having GD on their own, without any medical interventions.

The first paragraph of this paper recounts the findings of an earlier (2011), paper that analyzed 246 children with GD, and found that in follow-up studies, 84% of them had "desisted" from having GD - without undergoing any medical interventions.

== Now on to the 2013 paper:

The 2nd paragraph discusses an additional study (done by Wallein +), on 77 GD kids in which 56 "desisted".

Original grouping is 127. Of the original group 77 continued as normal. So that would leave 80 that was considered "defectors". So far this sounds pretty bad till we break the numbers down. Of the 80 we get that number from two sources. 52 responders and 28 that didn't respond at all. So at this point we have 52 detractors, 77 maintained gender dysphoria and 28 unknowns.
Of the 52 detractors 38 didn't meet the original threshold for a gender dysphoria diagnosis in the first place. They may have been there for the diagnosis or for further followups ect. I don't know and can't say for sure. But I can say that they were not diagnosed at that time. So currently we have 14 of the original 127 that are detractors that have stated that they are trans from the beginning. Which is 9% (a far far cry from the 80 % claimed by the link).

Even from that 9% we still have to understand that the respondents were not the children themselves but the parents

I think maybe you have some typos in this section? I'm not seeing how your math works?

Also, how were you able to conclude that some of the kids didn't meet the original threshold? Is that discussed in some other paper?

So which is why I like to use studies of actual trans people and the regret rates of those that have transitioned rather than those who have backed out of transitioning in the first place. Primarily because there are also factors involved in the latter that also complicate the statistics further. The number of trans people who are 100% trans and sure they are trans but simply don't transition because of various reasons exist. A number of them that try and choose not too because of unsupportive parents exist. Those that are unable to handle the backlash from community, friends and family may go back on transitioning. None of that makes them less trans. Its just further evidence that we need to treat trans people better than we do.

Regret rates have some utility, but they also have some flaws. The main flaw is that we typically have only short time periods after medical interventions in which we're measuring regret. So a person might have no regrets for the first year or two, but we don't know how they'll feel in 5 or 10 or 20 years. This I think, is where common sense and logic has to be applied. Do you think the idea of there being a social contagion aspect to GD holds any merit? If not, what's your sense as to why we have seen such an enormous increase in kids identifying as trans? What I've heard is that "it's safer now". While that could be a factor, I do not believe it's the only one.

As for treating trans people better, I agree, with a few caveats:

- My stance on this forum over the last several months has been that people under 21 with GD should receive only talk therapy. I have been called all sorts of horrible names because of this stance, but I see this as sort of pro-children and trans-neutral.
- We MUST separate trans people from trans activism. We should treat trans people better, but the trans activists promote many dubious ideas and we must be able to criticize and push back on bad ideas.

==

Lots more details we could go back and dig into more deeply, but this seems like a good sized bite for now? As always, if you want to reiterate points you want me to address, I'm happy to do so. I haven't skipped anything for nefarious reasons.

 

[icehorse]

Irrelevant.

Really? So what parental behaviors would warrant the state taking a child from their family?

For example, let's say a kid has GD, and the parents take the kid to talk therapy, but refuse medical interventions. Would that be sufficient for the state to take the child?

 

[Friend of Mara]

First, for RFers who aren't reading these studies, there are two terms worth understanding:

"persisters" - those children who persisted in having GD after going through puberty and being reassessed.
"desisters" - those children who stopped having GD on their own, without any medical interventions.

The first paragraph of this paper recounts the findings of an earlier (2011), paper that analyzed 246 children with GD, and found that in follow-up studies, 84% of them had "desisted" from having GD - without undergoing any medical interventions.

== Now on to the 2013 paper:

The 2nd paragraph discusses an additional study (done by Wallein +), on 77 GD kids in which 56 "desisted".

I also want it noted that the 2011 paper is highly controversial. And I mean that in the scholastic sense rather than the political one.

I think maybe you have some typos in this section? I'm not seeing how your math works?

Also, how were you able to conclude that some of the kids didn't meet the original threshold? Is that discussed in some other paper?

Yes there was a typo. In instances where I typed 77 I meant to type 47 as is represented in the graph on the main page of the link you had sent. And yes there are several papers discussing and rebutting this one. I can link you to a few if you'd like. But all I did was google the study and look up subsequent discussions around it to see what the actual experts were debating so that I can get a clearer view as well.

Although the chart on page 2 of the study shows the breakdown. Though I may need to run the math again. It was late at night and I think my brain didn't want to math right.

But the takeaway of what I was saying is that there were two groups within the groups. Those that have an actual diagnosis and those who did not have an actual diagnosis and were part of the subthreshold were those that did not. It means they were here enough to be looked at for questioning their gender or maybe to look at other possible mental issues but they did not qualify as having met the threshold for the diagnosis (thus sub-threshold). And it shows in each which percentage of which was in each grouping. So the ones that persisted were all in the 90's for meeting the threshold for the diagnosis while the ones that desisted were significantly lower. In the case of the "males" and "desistence" it was less than 50% of the total qualified for a diagnosis.

Regret rates have some utility, but they also have some flaws. The main flaw is that we typically have only short time periods after medical interventions in which we're measuring regret. So a person might have no regrets for the first year or two, but we don't know how they'll feel in 5 or 10 or 20 years. This I think, is where common sense and logic has to be applied. Do you think the idea of there being a social contagion aspect to GD holds any merit? If not, what's your sense as to why we have seen such an enormous increase in kids identifying as trans? What I've heard is that "it's safer now". While that could be a factor, I do not believe it's the only one.

I think that there are going to be kids that question their gender and it will take time for them to figure it out. I think there are going to be kids that want to stay exactly the way they were born and that is perfectly fine. Its one of the reasons why hormone blockers are so great. It gives us the opportunity to have a little extra time to figure these questions out. And as stated before they are "overwhelmingly safe" and will be given under the guidance of a doctor. And therapist will also be with the child through every step of the way. I don't personally wish being trans onto people. Its rough out there for them. If it was a choice I would tell them to not choose that. But its not a choice. Much like being gay or left handed isn't a choice.

And on that note there is exactly 0% merit behind the social contagion nonsense. It is not a supported theory even in the fragile "science" of sociology. As far as what "else" is at play. I have a slight theory on that but it only has to do with the rise in non-binary trans individuals rather than the binary trans individuals. And my hot take on that isn't really backed by science so I won't proclaim it as truth by any means. But I do think a lot of people are getting really tried of these forced gender roles in our society anyway. I think a lot of young people know what many of us already know and its that much of our gendered standards are bullcarp. Though we older folk are less likely to just uproot the whole system. Young people tend to be more rebellious like that. So I do think that there is the possibility that we see a rise of people who say "I don't feel like a boy or a girl. I just feel like a person." and taking that as a non-binary gender identity.

Best news about this is that most non-binary individuals (especially the ones that don't claim to have gender dysphoria) don't usually take hormones or get irreversible surgeries. Sometimes they might but that seems to be an atypical trend. Most of the time it is a social change. Usually clothing and their name.

As for treating trans people better, I agree, with a few caveats:

- My stance on this forum over the last several months has been that people under 21 with GD should receive only talk therapy. I have been called all sorts of horrible names because of this stance, but I see this as sort of pro-children and trans-neutral.
- We MUST separate trans people from trans activism. We should treat trans people better, but the trans activists promote many dubious ideas and we must be able to criticize and push back on bad ideas.

==

Lots more details we could go back and dig into more deeply, but this seems like a good sized bite for now? As always, if you want to reiterate points you want me to address, I'm happy to do so. I haven't skipped anything for nefarious reasons.

If you want to push adult decisions to 21 should everything be pushed to 21? Drinking is already there. Smoking, military service, driving, buying porn and having legally distinct autonomy from your parents should also be suspended to 21 to stay consistent. Otherwise everything should be brought down to 18 where adults are aloud to make adult decisions about their lives. Personally I am okay with having hormones wait till 18 if they allow puberty blockers earlier. Ideally 16/17 is the best age to start them but if they have to start at 18 I won't fight anyone here on it.

What are some of the dubious ideas if you don't mind listing some? I agree that the people and the politics of the thing should be separated. Specifically for them though. Their mere existence shouldn't have to be a political statement.

 

[metis]

- My stance on this forum over the last several months has been that people under 21 with GD should receive only talk therapy. I have been called all sorts of horrible names because of this stance, but I see this as sort of pro-children and trans-neutral.

So, you want to take away what the teen, his/her family, and their doctor has to say and feel what's best. Got it. How would you feel if I choose to interfere with personal decisions in your family?

 

[VoidCat]

So, you want to take away what the teen, his/her family, and their doctor has to say and feel what's best. Got it. How would you feel if I choose to interfere with personal decisions in your family?

You want to know what I find interesting? It's legal to give medically unnecessary puberty blockers to disabled kids who aren't trans particularly autistic ones without the childs input to slow their development and make things easier for the parent nobody says anything but give them to a trans kid everyone freaks.

 

[metis]

You want to know what I find interesting? It's legal to give medically unnecessary puberty blockers to disabled kids who aren't trans particularly autistic ones without the childs input to slow their development and make things easier for the parent nobody says anything but give them to a trans kid everyone freaks.

But who's to decide that it's supposedly "medically unnecessary"? I don't think that parents nor doctors should be sole deciders on such a serious matter.

 

[VoidCat]

But who's to decide that it's supposedly "medically unnecessary"? I don't think that parents nor doctors should be sole deciders on such a serious matter.

I dont think it's medically unnecessary for trans kids. It treats a medical problem. With situations regarding disabled folk and puberty blockers im solely talking of situations where it's not treating a medical problem like gender dysphoria, it's only to slow development so it's easier for the parents to do tasks such as picking up the kid bathing them and such.

 

[metis]

I dont think it's medically unnecessary for trans kids.

So, you're qualified to make such a decision for other families?

Not precisely the same, but you'll get the gist: one of our granddaughters came "out of the closet" a few years ago because she's gay, and do you realize how hard it is for so many to do this? Fortunately, our whole family is fully supportive of her decision.

 

[VoidCat]

So, you're qualified to make such a decision for other families?

Not precisely the same, but you'll get the gist: one of our granddaughters came "out of the closet" a few years ago because she's gay, and do you realize how hard it is for so many to do this? Fortunately, our whole family is fully supportive of her decision.

No. Medical boards have done so. I actually agree with you on your points. I just was using your post to introduce the fact that it's hypocritical opposing puberty blockers till the person is 21 for trans folk but stuff like medically unneeded puberty blockers for disabled folk is done and nobody bats an eye.

I was having difficulty finding @icehorse 's comment so i used yours