Effects of taking testosterone on ftm

I had no idea this was a side-effect until I saw Posie's latest video the other day.

What is interesting to me is that in Tasmania, one of the arguments being put forward for pushing through self-ID is that it will take away the need for women to have hysterectomies before they can legally transition (I have been told that these days most medical practitioners will sign off on documents after any form of clinical intervention but still, this is the party line here). What I find sad is that even if they do get the legislation through, hysterectomies will be an inevitability for many anyhow.

And yes, the fact that young people will perhaps never be able to experience intimacy and bonding with their future partners due to decisions that they are asked to make before they are legally able to even give consent to sexual acts is cruelty in the extreme IMO.

This youtube video has been in my head all day. It's nothing new, I've been aware of this for some time now. But since watching the video my head has been spinning with worry and anger.

My menopause started relatively early, all over by 47. I found the changes to my body and the emotional roller coaster due to hormonal fluctuations very hard to deal with. I found that some hrt prescriptions gave me permanent migraine and anxiety, some made me horribly depressed. Eventually I found the right balance. It took 2 years to even find something that helped. But I was a mature woman with a lot of life experience and wisdom accrued so I just about got through it. Had I had to go through it in my 20's or 30's I don't think I would have had the resources to get through it.

That some young people are now being told it's something they have to deal with as a matter of fact, and that they are accepting this as a necessary part of taking cross hormones and is simply a minor issue makes me very angry and upset.

This is not like having your TB jab or your HPV vaccination. This is going to have a huge impact on you.

I know all this has been said a thousand times on here but now and again it punches me in the head and stomach that this is happening.

R0wan to be fair, harming children‘s bodily autonomy for no good reason isn‘t a first in the modern West. Routine Male cirumcision has no scientific justification whatsoever, and yet, it is done regularly (and mostly without any religious rationalization, which I can wrap my head around on some level, even if I disagree). And why? It really looks like all there is to it is the money clinics can make selling Babies‘ foreskins and some strong pro-circ lobbyists like that one Australian doc, who apparently has a foreskin fetish (yes really. He was found being a member of such a site).

So maybe, it should not surprise us how easily children are sacrificed for the TRA-agenda.

I mean, an argument can be made Bowl that courtesy neoliberalism the public and its representatives are so strapped for cash, do weakened, so dependent on ‚the private sector‘ (the potent part of which amounts to a tiny network of individuals, network analyses suggest), that such top down politics can easily be bought.

Depending on my mood I am oscillating between this rationalization and some Uber-conspirational social engineering enigma that I can never quite grasp but that would sure make for a good movie - if I could ever make it concrete enough for a plot.

November 2018 Janice Turner, The Times:
Children sacrificed to appease trans lobby

From Topshop’s cave-in on changing rooms to the SNP’s guidance for schools, there is a mindless rush to appear right-on
(extract)
Topshop hasn’t built solid, separate unisex boxes as in, say, Urban Outfitters. They are just permitting men — any man — to walk into a flimsily curtained space where giggling teenage girls check out a friend’s new dress in their bras. Topshop’s female customers were baffled. Why sacrifice our privacy and safety? (When the US company Target adopted this policy, predatory men exploited it to snap photos under cubicles.) Why not create a discrete space for the few “non-binary” people like Travis to change?

Fair question. But the current trans movement is doctrinaire, uncompromising. Led by mainly older trans-women — ie born men — it won’t acknowledge women’s rights or feelings. It fights for two principles. First, “self-definition”: a person is the gender they “feel” inside, so a trans-woman “is” a woman even without physical change or while retaining male genitalia. Second, “affirmation”: everyone must acknowledge this inner gender identity. Hence the right to waltz into women’s private spaces is sacrosanct.

For months, researching the rise in referrals to gender clinics of teenage girls, I’ve been shocked at how the trans lobby, abetted by a cowed LGBT movement and deluded politicians, are prepared to sacrifice the wellbeing of children to attain those two goals. (continues)

This craze to expedite gender transition in children goes against all clinical advice for “watchful waiting”. The young brain evolves, children change their minds, puberty is troubling for many reasons. Yet the Scottish guidance allows no one to dispute a child’s view, maybe acquired on Reddit and Tumblr, that he or she is in “the wrong body”. Or to suggest that a child may simply be gay. The apparatus of medical transition, a hormone regime causing sterility, plus surgical removal of healthy tissue, is seen as wholly positive. PE teachers must tolerate girls using binders to strap down their hated breasts “which can lead to shortness of breath and can be painful during physical exertion” because they have “a positive impact on a young person’s mental health”.

We are being ordered to endorse a practice reminiscent of Chinese foot-binding or the Victorian tight-lacing craze where girls fainted to achieve the tiniest waist. Should we also hand out fresh razor blades so self-harm wounds don’t go septic? Or “affirm” anorexics’ delusions that they are fat?

In my research I heard from teachers, doctors, parents and trans-folk aghast at children being pushed towards drastic treatment before they can possibly understand how it will affect their future relationships and lives. None would speak out publicly: like Topshop, they feared being labelled transphobic.

Because how quickly we transition kids is the new measure of an enlightened society. Announcing proposals to let 12-year-olds change their legal gender, the SNP equalities secretary Angela Constance boasted that “Scotland rightly has a reputation as one of the most progressive countries in relation to LGBTI rights.” This proves the SNP is more right-on than even Corbyn Labour. Meanwhile the Tories, in a cynical pursuit of youth votes, push for legislative changes they don’t even grasp. “Being trans is not an illness,” said Theresa May recently, “and it should not be treated as such.” So why does it require surgery, drugs and lifelong patienthood?" (continues)

www.thetimes.co.uk/article/children-sacrificed-to-appease-trans-lobby-bq0m2mm95?shareToken=c7e354b669098f83725c569ac56040b0

Yes, maybe. If you have an ego the size of a planet and a budget to match, and an all consuming desire to validate and normalise your actions, what’s stopping you? Men have conquered half the planet with fewer resources and a thousandth of the technology

I doubt there’s a single driver to this. Or if there is it’s attracted a lot of other players who see they can benefit from it.

Don’t underestimate how a few monstrous egos can create huge change.

But why?!? Just to satisfy the Jenny Pritzkers of this world?

Tailored to the cultural and linguistic mores of each country...

This is a top down movement.

So do I, Bowl. This consensus that is sold to us by media, politicians, health care professionals, ngos, based on no evidence... why? And in German speaking countries they move in similar directions, but using distinct rationalizations (there the unisex bathroom and ‚self ID‘ issue is mostly played via the intersex angle. Including the byline that - I kid you not - not all intersex conditions can currently be diagnosed. So best go by the individual‘s feeling.)

I’m struck by something another poster said about this a while back; that there are some very vulnerable young people, the led, and the leaders.

The state has a duty of care to prevent (as far as it can) people who mean harm leading the vulnerable. The state is not only failing, it’s complicit. That is horrifying.

I have nothing but sympathy for young people questioning their identity, struggling with Their bodies and feeling alienated. I have nothing but sympathy for those with genuine gender dysphoria. At the same time, I believe there are some bad actors here who do not have the welfare of either of those groups as a target. Too many people with dubious motives are having influence in high places and getting laws and standards changed. And the state is rolling over, it’s not asking the tough questions and it’s not doing it’s due diligence

I want to know why

It is a dereliction of duty Bowl. When will people wake up to the horror show of it?

How have we come to this frightening medical nightmare? Powerful drugs handed out like smarties with little concern about the longer term consequences. It's just heartbreaking.

This. There have always and will always be people who are extremely vulnerable and who will be susceptible to being turned down certain paths - cults, extreme political groups, extreme religious groupings, etc.

But the state, the professional apparatus and structures should be professional. The should be conservative (small c) they should be wary and careful and act as a normalising force, and curtail the excesses. Medicine in particular should be evidence based and do no harm.

For the state bodies and apparatuses like the police, NHS, government etc to buy into this - it’s really worrying. It’s a dereliction of duty, a gross betrayal of young, vulnerable people of whom many seem to have additional needs or vulnerabilities like autism, or feeling vulnerable about coming out. I’m finding g that the really scary bit.

Where are the adults?

Personally, I'd rather people be able to say what they think on this board, rather than self-censor or feel they constantly have to watch their words.

I agree.

I don't think people should have children to avoid loneliness in old age, it is not fair to the children. There's a lot more to raising children than just not wanting to be lonely.

It is true that transpeople are likely to be isolated in old age ... but that's also because the fanatism that nowadays seem to go with it will likely alienate friends and siblings.

Likewise, "loneliness in old age" is not the only reason why infertility is so devastating to those that suffer from it.
Young couples who want children aren't likely to be thinking of their old age.

Is it really "unfeminist" to hold the opinion that people of either sex may be lonelier when they're older if they don't have children?

Personally, I'd rather people be able to say what they think on this board, rather than self-censor or feel they constantly have to watch their words. Even if something is said that is objectively untrue, it can provide an opportunity for discussion and reflection that can be valuable.

I've just given this a bit of thought - I'm 60 and my female partner (62) and I don't have children. For both of us this was through choice.

I don't think that suggesting people without children might be lonelier in older age than those who have them is necessarily untrue (though, of course, some people who do have children do not have those children near to them - a good friend in her 70s has a son who has lived in Oz for 20 years), nor is it unfeminist to suggest it.

And I don't want people to feel they have to self-censor such things because it might hurt the feelz of people like me. It's not something we've never thought of!

Is it really "unfeminist" to hold the opinion that people of either sex may be lonelier when they're older if they don't have children?

Personally, I'd rather people be able to say what they think on this board, rather than self-censor or feel they constantly have to watch their words. Even if something is said that is objectively untrue, it can provide an opportunity for discussion and reflection that can be valuable.

This is well known & long recognised:

NHS
"Anabolic steroids are prescription-only medicines that are sometimes taken without medical advice to increase muscle mass and improve athletic performance.

If used in this way, they can cause serious side effects and addiction.

Anabolic steroids are manufactured drugs that mimic the effects of the male hormone testosterone

Side effects of anabolic steroids
Regularly taking anabolic steroids can lead to physical and psychological changes in both men and women, as well as potentially dangerous medical conditions.

Why people misuse anabolic steroids
Anabolic steroids can be used as performance-enhancing drugs that increase muscle mass and decrease fat, as well as causing many undesirable effects. Some athletes, weightlifters and bodybuilders take them regularly to improve their physical performance and build up their bodies.

However, people of all ages have been known to misuse these drugs, including adolescent boys who suffer from body dysmorphic disorder. This is a mental health condition where a person spends a lot of time worrying about flaws in their appearance. These flaws are often unnoticeable to others.

Boys and men who have body dysmorphic disorder may take anabolic steroids because they don't see themselves as being physically big enough or strong enough.

Some people believe taking anabolic steroids will help them become fit and healthy. This isn't true: taking anabolic steroids is a dangerous drug habit.

Physical effects
In women, anabolic steroids can cause:

facial hair growth and body hair
loss of breasts
swelling of the clitoris
a deepened voice
an increased sex drive
problems with periods
hair loss
severe acne
In addition, both men and women who take anabolic steroids can develop any of the following medical conditions:

heart attack or stroke
liver or kidney problems or failure
high blood pressure (hypertension)
blood clots
fluid retention
high cholesterol

Psychological effects
Misusing anabolic steroids can also cause the following psychological or emotional effects:

aggressive behaviour
mood swings
paranoia
manic behaviour
hallucinations and delusions
Stunted growth in adolescents
Anabolic steroids accelerate bone growth, so if they're misused by adolescents who haven't yet had the growth spurt associated with puberty, the drugs can cause premature ageing of the bones and restricted growth.

Addiction
Like many other substances, anabolic steroids are addictive. This means you can crave the drug, require more to get the same effect, and have withdrawal symptoms if you suddenly stop taking them.

A person who is addicted to anabolic steroids will want to keep using them despite experiencing unpleasant physical side effects.

When doctors prescribe steroid medication, they always advise coming off the medication slowly by gradually reducing the dose. Coming off anabolic steroids suddenly can result in withdrawal symptoms that include:

depression and apathy
feelings of anxiety
difficulty concentrating
insomnia
anorexia
decreased sex drive
extreme tiredness (fatigue)
headaches
muscle and joint pain"

www.nhs.uk/conditions/anabolic-steroid-misuse/

I share your concerns on this, OP, but am slightly taken aback that, as a poster on a feminism board, you are suggesting that not having one's own biological children = probable loneliness.

It's so sad to think of all these young people going through menopause so early, and unable to use hrt to alleviate some of the awful symptom that brings.

And TW taking hrt for years on end when women are only allowed it fir a few years due to health risks. If it's not safe for biological females how can it be safe for them?

How have we come to this frightening medical nightmare? Powerful drugs handed out like smarties with little concern about the longer term consequences. It's just heartbreaking.

Though I doubt it will make a difference to most transitioners, who from what I gather are generally in ,you do what you have to do‘ and ,who wants to live into their 40‘s anyway‘ mode.

Likely. They do seem to hate older women.

I, personally, admired my grandmother, thought she was much cooler than my parents, and set myself the goal of living to 120 and setting a record.

Which is not a likely mindset for a trans identified person, I admit.

Ah, the beauty of being a guinea pig. But good that they talk about it, I hope gender clinics and medical professionals will pick this up and inform prospective T-consumers accordingly.
Though I doubt it will make a difference to most transitioners, who from what I gather are generally in ,you do what you have to do‘ and ,who wants to live into their 40‘s anyway‘ mode.
(Not that I was much different up to my early 20‘s).

No-one knows what the long-term effects of cross-sex hormones are. I worry that there will be a whole raft of unpleasant symptoms further down the line.

I think we have some idea of the long-term effects of short-term testosterone on the female body, thanks to the countries that doped their female athletes with it.
Might be that no one bothered gathering the data, but I am sure those women can tell some tales.

We also know from disorders that cause the female body to produce too much testosterone what the effects of long-term low dose excess testosterone are.

All in all, we certainly know enough to be able to tell that testosterone isn't good for women.

The jury may still be out on estrogen for men, (men with beer breasts seem to do just fine, apart from the breasts) but we could have known thirty years ago that testosterone isn't good for women.

These are major surgeries. Having a double mastectomy is a big deal as anyone who has had one or known someone who has had one for breast cancer will know.
Having a full hysterectomy will send you into menopause. Both main types - leaving the ovaries intact or not will have significant effects in the body - there’s a much bigger risk of pelvic floor issues, prolapse, fistula etc.

Cross sex hormones have significant effects on the body and none of these are positive.

We dont know what the effects of 40+ years of this will be. I doubt it will be anything other than unpleasant and painful for thebpatients concerned.

The body is a system. It works as a whole. It is not a plug and play arrangement where you can take bits out or add bits on and all is OK. Sex hormones have system side effects, removing an organ affects the entire body. This view of the body as a collection of bits rather than a whole I find quite disturbing.