Are kids on blockers a-sexual as adults?

BTW I think the thread may be allowed to stay up if we don't mention a certain organisation, a certain mother/CEO or her child, or speculate about the ethics/sanity/legality of her parenting choices. I could be wrong though. Let's see.

No, nothing to see here

twitter.com/mimmymum/status/1058310179111034880

I've been realising with horror that if a kids takes blockers before puberty, then goes on to hormones and surgery, then they'll not only be sterile but likely end up incapable of sexual function. They'll be asexual as an adult.

It's worse even than that though really. Yes, they will end up asexual but who are 'they?' Many of them are autistic or have survived complex sexual assault. They are children at the more vulnerable end of the spectrum. Most would grow up to be comfortable in their own skin if they had adequate mental health support. We're mutilating completely physically healthy people!

And many will realise sometimes up to 2 decades later that they desperately want their own biological children and can't have them not to mention the fact many will get cancer or complications from having, say, a hysterectomy.

Loss of sexual function is a dreadful thing though and needs shouting about for its own sake. Wouldn't you think the adult trans community would want to campaign hard for much better mental health support so as few people as possible end up having damaging surgery? It says quite a lot that they aren't.

If there's one thing we learn from this issue Micke it's that most gender identity ideology "logic" is the wrong way round.

For the ideologues, the key is to prevent people from thinking about this or from talking about it when they've seen it.

Maybe we should encourage teenagers to masturbate

My experience as a teenager is that encouragement isn't needed.

Quite often OP asking these questions will get an aggressive admonition in response that you are obsessing over trans people's genitals and not thinking about them as people

Which is clearly the wrong way round - we're thinking of them as people, and not obsessing over their genitals.

The short answer is we don’t really know because nobody is considering it or monitoring it.

It’s hugely disturbing - the idea of successfully treating an adult with dysmorphia is that their life improves Post transition. But to ‘treat’ a child means that their reproductive ability and future sexual function is destroyed.

We then have to ask - who is this actually bring done for? For a child who will grow into a person who has no reproductive ability, no ability to experience sexual pleasure and a prebuscent physiology? And joint damage, cognitive damage etc?

Who is this benefitting? Someone weeks back said something about this creating a doll class and a controller class and I think that was perceptive.

Remember that the push in adults is for demedicalisation. No treatment and of course full sexual function.

Funny how the ‘harmless pause button’ crowd disappear when faced with Tammy’s personal experience

Maybe we should encourage teenagers to masturbate. Then say to them "transition means you will never have that feeling again .... ever"

I wonder how many of them would want to lose the ability to orgasm once they understood what it meant they were giving up?

I’ve posted about this before but I was on one of these drugs for two years in my mid 20s, so a decade ago. I’ve lost all sex drive, to the point that the thought of being touched sexually makes me feel ill, and my health is dire (seems my hormones are a mess but doctors aren’t interested in helping). I can’t imagine what happens if you’re on them during adolescence.

I am in no way an expert but from my understanding, adult sexual function is a culmination of hormones coupled with brain development. Puberty being the process that allows for the maturation of sexual function is therefore integral. I suspect that, because the process starts at different ages and progresses at different rates, that the extent that puberty delay and/or an induction of a cross sexed puberty effects each child will be different, so some children like JJ will be asexual but some may retain desire if puberty was interrupted after that process had already happened for them.

Of course surgery on top of hormones adds a whole other layer because nerves are being cut/lost (which must also reduce sensation). If I remember correctly I think JJ opted for the surgery where they use a sub-layer of skin from the abdomen rather than th colon surgery - just for accuracy’s sake.

As for girls on T, that’s an interesting question and I don’t really know the answer. I have heard transmen describe an increase in desire but how it would impact the development of sexual function in pubertal girls, I don’t know.

And yes, JJ has been told they will be in effect asexual. They talk in terms of romantic attachments and pansexuality. It is unclear in the programme whether the medics or JJ's parents were aware of this being the outcome when the decisions were made to put them on medication. I have seen a happy tweet to someone about 'and if the meds make you asexual it's just another identity!'

Words fail. This is a massive, massive safeguarding nightmare, it's a terrible thing to do and historically such procedures have been regarded as immoral and without place in a civilised society since the late 1860s when they stopped the creation of (often consenting and actively requesting) castrato boys to preserve their voice career for Italian opera.

This thread will be deleted any second now since we're not supposed to talk about the massively life altering, appalling realities of this, or its impact on safeguarding.

Quite often OP asking these questions will get an aggressive admonition in response that you are obsessing over trans people's genitals and not thinking about them as people. It's usually a very effective tactic for closing down discussion.

The widespread use of such tactics have pretty much stopped discussing about these important issues. It's amazing isn't it?

What kind of person wants to have sex with someone who can't ever gain sexual pleasure from it?

Isn’t that the point of FGM? To make sure sexual pleasure is for the man, not the woman, who might otherwise be lead into sinfulness?

Wasn't there another thread on this recently, where someone linked to specialists discussing the issue as one that they weren't sure about and hadn't really paid any attention to? Totally bizarre...