South Carolina OKs ban on gender affirming care.

[Laniakea]

That statement is not logical. It's everyone else's fault but it's not exactlh everyone else's fault apparently?

I was using sarcasm.

 

[Left Coast]

The comparison did occur to me as well.

Not to mention a wide variety of anti-lgbt tropes. People used to tell me I would grow out of my same sex attraction.
So when I hear 'maybe they will grow out of it', I just hear 'Maybe we can scare/tempt them back into the closet'.

It's similar, no doubt. And in both cases, it tends to fall back on an underlying assumption that trans identity/gayness are inherently undesirable, dysfunctional, or a type of psychopathy that needs to be "cured" rather than supported.

 

[Laniakea]

Half of detransitioners feel like they didn't have proper evaluation by doctors. And it is absolutely not shifting the blame to say 'yeah, that is the quintessential American experience.' All three of my major diagnosis in life were ones I discovered through my own research and contacts and brought to doctors. Doctors who had misidentified or ignored symptoms because education and training on women's health is especially poor. To say nothing of critically underfunded and poorly accessed mental healthcare.

But the solution isn't to stop healthcare for trans people, it's to make it more accessible, with more knowledgable specialists, at prices patients can afford. So nobody feels like they had a one and done evaluation, and where you can shop around doctors and second opinions without waiting years and breaking the bank.

Again, the majority of detransitioners want more gender affirming care accessibility, not less.

As you have already been shown, the article says that it's TRANSITIONERS WHO CHANGED THEIR SEX FROM WHAT THEY WERE BORN WITH that have the regrets.

 

[icehorse]

It is one way that is demonstrably effective and which there are no rational or evidence-based reasons to outlaw.

It's not demonstrably any more effective than pogo stick therapy.
As I just said to @libre, the document SHE provided me lists dozens and dozens of studies done by pro-GAC researchers and doctors, all focused on dealing with the myriad negative medical consequences of these drugs and surgeries.

You're assuming what you haven't proved. All drugs and medical procedures involve risk. Many procedures are irreversible. Why the double standard for drugs and surgeries that help trans people?

No double standard. IF and only IF a medical intervention has efficacy, does it become a medial option. And of course, many medical courses of action come with risks. But there are two key points here:

1 - GAC is UNPROVEN when compared to talk therapy alone.
2 - Advocates tell us over and over again that GAC drugs are safe and reversible, and they are not.

So, if a medical intervention has some efficacy, then part of medical practice is to tell the patient what the risks are.

GAC advocates fail on both fronts. They fail on efficacy and they fail on transparency.

 

[Left Coast]

…

Suicide rates remain high post transition because the issue is deeper than gender. It’s a meaning crisis and it’s not solved through gender identity. Your maternal instinct on behalf of your friend might be biasing you and that’s understandable.

See here for one example that you are simply incorrect about the effectiveness of GAC on reducing suicidality:

Association Between Gender-Affirming Surgeries and Mental Health Outcomes

This study evaluates associations between gender-affirming surgeries and mental health outcomes, including psychological distress, substance use, and suicide risk.

jamanetwork.com

 

[SkepticThinker]

…

Suicide rates remain high post transition because the issue is deeper than gender. It’s a meaning crisis and it’s not solved through gender identity.

Gee, could that possibly have something to do with the way society treats them?

Your maternal instinct on behalf of your friend might be biasing you and that’s understandable.

Please don't patronize me, thanks.

 

[icehorse]

Just once. What study demonstrates that all people under age 18 are incapable of knowing they are transgender?

That's not necessary. You have to provide a study that proves that a therapist can ALWAYS distinguish between GD kids who will end up trans and GD kids who will not.

Without that study, you are throwing GD gay kids under the bus. You are supporting ruining the lives of gay kids who have GD.

It's similar, no doubt. And in both cases, it tends to fall back on an underlying assumption that trans identity/gayness are inherently undesirable, dysfunctional, or a type of psychopathy that needs to be "cured" rather than supported.

No it falls back on: First, do no harm.

GAC drugs are dangerous, and irreversible, i.e., harmful.

As for being "supported", tell me other conditions that require a lifetime of medical interventions that are not considered conditions to be cured?

 

[icehorse]

See here for one example that you are simply incorrect about the effectiveness of GAC on reducing suicidality:

Association Between Gender-Affirming Surgeries and Mental Health Outcomes

This study evaluates associations between gender-affirming surgeries and mental health outcomes, including psychological distress, substance use, and suicide risk.

jamanetwork.com

And once again, no comparison with kids who received ONLY talk therapy.

All of these studies seem to be designed ASSUMING that GAC is inevitable and then showing how good the results are.

But GAC is NOT the only way forward.

Why are you so fixated on transitioning kids that might not need transitioning?

 

[libre]

I did not read the entire document, but I did study the table of contents (ToC).

How about the exact page that I asked you to read, which defends the claim I made that you requested a source for?

 

[Left Coast]

It's not demonstrably any more effective than pogo stick therapy.

Ie, it's no more effective than doing nothing? Surely you must know that isn't supported by the data. I just posted a link in the last post here.

As I just said to @libre, the document SHE provided me lists dozens and dozens of studies done by pro-GAC researchers and doctors, all focused on dealing with the myriad negative medical consequences of these drugs and surgeries.

Many drugs and surgeries (every single one I can think of, actually) has negative medical consequences for some number of people. So what?

No double standard. IF and only IF a medical intervention has efficacy,

And GAC does.

does it become a medial option. And of course, many medical courses of action come with risks. But there are two key points here:

1 - GAC is UNPROVEN when compared to talk therapy alone.
2 - Advocates tell us over and over again that GAC drugs are safe and reversible, and they are not.

The whole reason medical interventions are used in clinical practice is because trans and non-binary people are not all helped with just psychotherapy alone. This is why organizations of psychotherapists like the APA are firmly in support of GAC. They recognize it helps their patients, and that psychotherapy undertaken with the goal of changing trans people's gender identity is demonstrably harmful.

Proposed Discussion Points to Oppose Gender-Affirming Care Criminalization Bills

In 2020, legislatures in at least six states introduced legislation that would in some form criminalize the providing of certain gender affirming services—including temporary puberty blockers or hormone therapy—to transgender or gender questioning youth.

www.apa.org

https://www.apa.org/about/policy/resolution-gender-identity-change-efforts.pdf

So, if a medical intervention has some efficacy, then part of medical practice is to tell the patient what the risks are.

Obviously. And this occurs.

GAC advocates fail on both fronts. They fail on efficacy and they fail on transparency.

"GAC advocates" are not prescribing medications or performing surgeries on anyone. Doctors and other licensed medical professionals are. Patients are informed ahead of time about potential risks and complications of these treatments. How many trans people who have undergone GAC have you actually spoken to about what it's like?

 

[Left Coast]

And once again, no comparison with kids who received ONLY talk therapy.

The comparison group was trans people who did not receive any gender-affirming surgeries.

All of these studies seem to be designed ASSUMING that GAC is inevitable and then showing how good the results are.

But GAC is NOT the only way forward.

Why are you so fixated on transitioning kids that might not need transitioning?

Between the two of us, one of us is fixated on trans issues. It ain't me.

Do you really not believe that doctors and other clinicians whose literal job it is every day to treat these patients don't understand the risks, don't want to see their patient's lives get better, don't know the scientific research or best practices underlying GAC? Really? Like...really?

 

[libre]

Here's what the ToC reveals:

- Dozens of studies focused on dealing with the negative medical issues associated with GAC. So the document that YOU provided helps me make the case that GAC is dangerous.

You're able to argue that GAC is dangerous from the Table of Contents of a document that you didn't read?

That truly is amazing, and indicates that the document backs up your argument, and not your own ability to draw conclusions from headlines.

 

[Laniakea]

The comparison group was trans people who did not receive any gender-affirming surgeries.



Between the two of us, one of us is fixated on trans issues. It ain't me.

Do you really not believe that doctors and other clinicians whose literal job it is every day to treat these patients don't understand the risks, don't want to see their patient's lives get better, don't know the scientific research or best practices underlying GAC? Really? Like...really?

This thread is about trans issues. That's what we're supposed to be fixated on here.

 

[Left Coast]

That's not necessary. You have to provide a study that proves that a therapist can ALWAYS distinguish between GD kids who will end up trans and GD kids who will not.

No, I don't. because I didn't claim every therapist on Earth has that ability (but I'll bet money the average therapist knows better than you do). You, however, claimed that every minor on Earth is incapable of knowing if they are trans. Therefore, the onus here is on you.

Without that study, you are throwing GD gay kids under the bus. You are supporting ruining the lives of gay kids who have GD.

What absolute absurdity.

No it falls back on: First, do no harm.

GAC drugs are dangerous, and irreversible, i.e., harmful.

Dangerous compared to what? It's "dangerous," by your logic, to go outside and cross the street. People get hit by cars every day. So what?

As for being "supported", tell me other conditions that require a lifetime of medical interventions that are not considered conditions to be cured?

Gender dysphoria is the issue to be cured, not people being transgender.

 

[Left Coast]

This thread is about trans issues. That's what we're supposed to be fixated on here.

The person I was responding to there has a history of arguing with particular passion about this issue. Repeatedly.

 

[Samael_Khan]

I think that would be a good idea. Perhaps a better idea would be to teach COMPARATIVE RELIGION to high school kids

Exactly. That IS a better idea. But then we have to make sure whoever teaches this is as unbiased as possible. Which is tricky.

 

[icehorse]

You're able to argue that GAC is dangerous from the Table of Contents of a document that you didn't read?

That truly is amazing, and indicates that the document backs up your argument, and not your own ability to draw conclusions from headlines.

Did YOU read the ToC? ToC's are quite useful. I've written 14 books and designed the ToCs for all of them. I've coached over 500 authors and helped them design ToCs. Take 10 minutes and read the ToC that YOU provided. You asked me to take the time to read what you sent me. It would appear that I've taken more time than you ON YOUR DOCUMENT !!

 

[Treasure Hunter]

And once again, no comparison with kids who received ONLY talk therapy.

All of these studies seem to be designed ASSUMING that GAC is inevitable and then showing how good the results are.

But GAC is NOT the only way forward.

Why are you so fixated on transitioning kids that might not need transitioning?

Right, I’m extremely pro affirmation because it works, but what has lasting benefit is affirmation of the individuating self. A strong gender identity supplants the self.

I’m not objecting to affirmative care in the least. I just strongly disagree that affirmative care should be done through the frame of gender.

 

[icehorse]

Gender dysphoria is the issue to be cured, not people being transgender.

Hey! We have found a point of agreement!

And my point is that GAC ASSUMES that the cure for GD is transitioning. And in many cases, that's not true. So I'm advocating for kids who NO ONE knows how they will develop.

You seem to be advocating for the idea that the way to cure GD is through transitioning. That's true SOMETIMES, but not always, and the GAC crowd isn't transparent about that.

 

[Laniakea]

Right, I’m extremely pro affirmation because it works, but what has lasting benefit is affirmation of the individuating self. A strong gender identity supplants the self.

I’m not objecting to affirmative care in the least. I just strongly disagree that affirmative care should be done through the frame of gender.

Would you be pro affirmation for those who feel depressed and are suicidal? It seems to work in Canada, and nobody who goes through with it ever claims to regret it.