Its offical : Transphobia is here to stay!
- Thread starter dirtydaveiii
- Start date
- Status
Blanchard, Zucker, Littman.
Just sticking to the classics, I see.
... no Marchiano?
So let's see, since you don't bother to link to the studies, I'll provide them:
First:
"One study showed that, without social transition, nearly two-thirds of pre-teen gender-dysphoric males grow up to be gay or bisexual.
A University of Toronto study found that 63.6% of boys with early onset gender dysphoria, who received ‘watchful waiting’ treatment and no pre-pubertal social transition, grew up to be gay or bisexual.
Only 12% of the study participants continued to identify as transfeminine.
This would infer that Watchful Waiting is a FAR, FAR superior model than Affirmation right? "
Singh, D., Bradley, S.J. & Zucker, K.J. (2021). A Follow-Up Study of Boys With Gender Identity Disorder. Frontiers in Psychology
As you can see if you read it, this study doesn't discuss "watchful waiting" at all. It also doesn't compare it to affirmation.
It looked at boys transitioning back in the late 80s and followed up to the early 2000s.
It even acknowledges that at the time, treatment was more focused on convincing children not to transition.
So maybe don't oversell it.
Second:
After sex reassignment surgery, one study showed that adult transsexual clients were 4.9 times more likely to have made a suicide attempt and 19.1 times more likely to have died from suicide, after adjusting for prior psychiatric comorbidity
Zucker, K.J., Lawrence, A.A., Kreukels, B.P. (2016). Gender Dysphoria in Adults. Annu Rev Clin Psychol.
This is normally behind a paywall, but (unsurprisingly) you can find the pdf on sites like https://stoptransingkids.wordpress.com/. I found an open Sci-Hub link, though, so people can read it without the markups on the pdf. Those dramatic suicide numbers show up on page 227 (p.11) of the pdf. (You can also find it in the supplemental tables if you really want to follow it up.)
As you can see, these numbers come from a study by Dhenje and their colleagues. You will also notice that I pointed out who the controls were in this study - the controls were people who did not suffer from GD. In other words, what this study found was that people who had undergone sex-reassignment surgery were 4.9 times more likely to have made a suicide attempt and 19.1 times more likely to have died from suicide than someone who didn't suffer from gender dysphoria.
So, since this was just a summary and I believe in primary sources, I went to see if I could find the Dhenje 2011 paper and it is right here:
Dhejne, C., Lichtenstein, P., Boman, M., et. al. (2011). Long-term follow-up of transsexual persons undergoing sex reassignment surgery: cohort study in Sweden, PLoS One.
(PMID: 21364939 / PMCID: PMC3043071 / DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0016885)
It's a longitudinal study, as described. And yes, the controls are correctly described as well - those numbers are in comparison to people matched from the general population.
Their argument is that as a study of general mortality and morbidity, it is reasonable to do that. Of course, this creates a limitation - and it is an important one, as they specify in the discussion.
So, you know, it is kind of interesting that you framed it in a way to imply exactly that the treatment was causing the suicides.
Excited for the Littman. Maybe some Bailey? Some Laidlaw?
"Adults who affirm children as trans are at their core unable to merely accept a child who is effeminate, who doesn't confirm to often sexist stereotypes."
The watchful waiting model
The “watchful waiting” model was designed by the members of the interdisciplinary team at the Amsterdam Center of Expertise on Gender Dysphoria, VU University Medical Center, under the leadership of Dr Peggy Cohen-Kettenis. Borrowing from the medical use of GnRH agonists for children exhibiting precocious puberty, the Netherlands team is responsible for introducing the use of puberty blockers for gender purposes, to put a pause on pubertal growth and allow more time for a youth to explore their gender and consolidate their adolescent gender identity, with the future possibility of cross-sex hormone therapy to align their bodies with their affirmed gender identity. In contrast to the live in your own skin approach, a young child’s demonstration of gender nonconformity, be it in identity, expressions, or both, is not to be manipulated in any way, but observed over time. If a child’s cross-gender identifications and affirmations are persistent over time, interventions are made available for a child to consolidate a transgender identity, once it is assessed, through therapeutic intervention and psychometric assessment, as in the best interests of the child. These interventions include social transitions (the shift from one gender to another, including possible name change, gender marker change, and gender pronoun changes), puberty blockers, and later hormones and possible gender-affirming surgeries. No attempts are made to alter a child’s gender identity or expressions; yet it is postulated in this model that it would be better to hold off until puberty on any social transitions of a child from one gender to another, and instead give them safe spaces to fully express their gender as they prefer before facilitating any full gender transitions.18,19 The rationale for holding off on any social transitions until adolescence is not to ward off a transgender identity but rather that 1) it would be advantageous that a child experiences the first stages of physical puberty for that child to best make a determination of the gender that feels most authentic to him/her; 2) given developmental stages of childhood, facilitating a social transition from one gender to another at a young age may create a form of cognitive constriction – the child may be prematurely blocked from considering any other possibilities once moved into a cross-gender status and socially constricted from further childhood gender exploration because now they know the cross-gender identity is what everyone has come to expect from them; 3) socially transitioning a child at a very young age may preclude the child from maintaining a realistic understanding of their body and historical status – as a penis-bodied (once a boy) or a vagina-bodied (once a girl) person. In informing their practices, this model, like the live in your own skin model, relies on the data gathered about “persisters” and “desisters”, both at their own clinic in the Netherlands and in other international studies, particularly those conducted at the Centre for Addiction and Mental Health (CAMH) gender program in Toronto. In the most recent review of these studies, it was found that 63% of the children seeking services at a gender clinic at a young age, and diagnosed with gender dysphoria, no longer had that diagnosis at puberty, while 37% did have the diagnosis consistently from early childhood to adolescence.20 Since a large majority of gender nonconforming young children seeking services at gender clinics desist in their gender dysphoria by adolescence, best practices would be to wait and see if the child persists into adolescence before making any significant changes in a child’s gender identity.
During the preadolescent waiting period, the children are followed carefully by the clinical team in the watchful waiting model, with the support of outside therapists in the community (which is required before a child can receive medical services), to assure that the children are growing well and getting their emotional needs met, and in preparation for later transitioning and medical interventions if the child proves to be a good candidate. Like in the live in your own skin model, the children going through the program also receive a full battery of psychological tests, documenting not only their gender status but also their cognitive–social–emotional functioning. Some of these instruments are delivered to the children directly, some to their parents or teachers.
If the mother asking for help with her 4-year-old were to attend the Amsterdam clinic with her child, the team might do an assessment and advise that the 4-year-old be followed over time, with the understanding that if her son’s declarations of wanting to be a girl persisted over time and if he continued to be drawn only to “girl” toys and activities, consideration of puberty blockers to buy more time to explore gender could certainly happen later, but for now it would be best to let her son continue to be a son free to explore whatever activities he enjoyed, with no corrections on his expressed desire to be a girl.
Gender nonconforming youth: current perspectives - PMC
Beginning with a case vignette, a discussion follows of the reformulation of theories of gender development taking into consideration the recent upsurge of gender nonconforming and transgender youth presenting for gender services and also in the ...
www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
Watchful waiting doesn’t mean no puberty blockers: Anti-trans researchers misrepresent academic…
In the latest issue of the American Journal of Bioethics, a peer commentary by Michael Laidlaw, Michelle Cretella, and G. Kevin Donovan…
As I apprehend "watchful waiting" and the "Dutch model" from the 2 above articles, hormone therapy and gender choice reinforcement are simply delayed to 12 years old. Correct me if I am wrong.
That's a real winner - a professional anti vaxx, extreme right performance artist.
Mitchy, few doctors agree with you. From what I can see, all professional bodies agree that gender dysphoria is real.
You might as well recite other rightie garbage like "COVID is a hoax created in a lab by George Soros." No reputable doctor believes that.
But the medical community doesn't agree with you. You also claimed that the vaccines were a hoax, IIRC.
You're the same dude who cheered on the violent anti vaxx rioters in Australia and said that they were "freedom fighters" when they attacked and beat police and reporters.
Mitcy, he provoked them and the assault was minor from a person far smaller and weaker than him. Grow up.
What, that blonde chick/man, with the orange umbrella, was big in size. He took the first punch at Chris.
She / he did. But the assault was provoked by Chris standing there with his sign and creating tension. The assault was minor.
The female cop was dead-on correct that this was Chris's fault.
You can't provoke people like Chris did and expect the cops to protect you from a minor push / shove. The cops aren't going to do it. Chris was there, following trans people around, taunting them and creating tension and filming the reaction. This is a standard rightie pattern of behaviour. Create a crisis by provoking bystanders or authority and when the consequences happen, claim to be a "victim".
You've given several examples of exactly this in the last 2 or 3 days. You're so dense that you don't see the pattern or the strategy.
So, Mitchy. Assuming that I agree that medical profit partially drives the transition of children - and I agree that's probably true - what solution do you propose for gender dysphoric early adolescents?
The vast majority of medical associations appear to agree that gender dysphoria is real and therefore should be medically cared for. So what do you propose?
Yes, I see the pattern, but Chris is just trying to be a change agent, to help children.
What Scott Newgent says. That early adolescents embrace their differences, and when they get older, things will get easier for them. Medically mutilating adolescents, who are highly vulnerable, is not the answer.
Except I don't see anywhere that gender reassignment surgery is performed on adolescents.
- Status
