Please or to access all these features

Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

'Do you want a 65 pound kid or a dead kid?'

110 replies

Gasp0deTheW0nderD0g · 11/11/2019 20:07

Fantastic thread copied over from Twitter. @gigilarue4, a US woman, posted it yesterday.
***
Imagine, if you will, your thirteen year old daughter coming to you, out of the blue with some news. Imagine your happy, great looking, healthy, smart, successful, socially active child coming to you and saying tearfully “Mom, I’m too fat. I’m not supposed to be 105 pounds. I’m supposed to be 65 pounds. I hate to look in the mirror and I hate my body this way”.

Suddenly, they start wearing baggy jeans, heavy sweatshirts and oversized clothes to make themselves appear smaller. They spend hours on the internet looking at pictures of 65 pound people who have successfully achieved their goal with excessive dieting and liposuction. They become obsessed with every bite of food they take, after a lifetime of loving French fries, pizza, ice cream, pasta, cooking- suddenly that passion for food has evaporated. All they think about is how happy they will be when they get to be 65 pounds.

You talk to the counselor at their school. She says, “Awww…talk to this person, she’s an expert”, and she hands you a business card. The person is a doctor at Children’s Hospital, and she has an Eating Disorder clinic that is world famous. You call and explain your situation to her social worker.

The social worker says that you kid can come in and be put on a liquid diet of 500 calories a day and will reach her goal weight of 65 pounds in a few months. They can then do liposuction on the areas that didn’t thin out they way they should have.

You pause, certain you misheard her and say, “Excuse me? She’s supposed to be 105 pounds. That’s a healthy weight”, & the social worker says, ”Well, you need to accept that you now have a 65 pound child. The suicide rate for kids with this issue is 40%. Do you want a 65 pound kid or a dead kid?”

You obviously want your kid alive so you ask about therapy. The social worker says “We don’t find mental health evaluations useful. These kids just know who they are and once they realize this about
themselves, parents need to step out of the way and let them take this journey. If we have to involve the law to get parents on the right side of this, we will. That’s a last resort, but it happens.I do have a therapist who is also 65 pounds, and they can talk to your kid about
how the process works”.

You say thank you and hang up. Something doesn’t feel right. You call a few other therapists and they either don’t work with kids or they have a very limited knowledge of this particular Eating Disorder. A few say they specialize in this issue and have had several patients that have eventually all gotten to 65 pounds. “Nobody in my practice has ever not gone down the road”, they say, “They just know what’s right for them”.

In the following weeks, your kid stops eating and develops depression, anxiety and spends too much time looking at emaciated people on Instagram. Every conversation is about food or weight-loss, every meal is excruciating. Any attempts to use logic like, “65 pounds is not a healthy weight and impossible to maintain that long term without serious health effects” is met with anger and accusations of invalidating her authentic self.

You research more and find that the consensus of all of the major medical organizations- Pediatric Endocrine Society, American Academy of Pediatrics, American Medial Association-is that once your kid decides they are supposed to be 65 pounds, there’s nothing anyone can do. They just know, and you need to support them. Simply having the thought is enough to proceed with the liquid diet and liposuction.

Any attempt to reason with them or convince them to nourish themselves is considered child abuse conversion therapy and laws are enacted to prevent therapists who might be concerned about their mental well being from addressing it.

You come across several websites created by kids who did this exact thing- who are now older and their bodies are permanently destroyed from adverse effects of long term starvation.Their brains, organs and metabolic system is out of whack and it will never be the same. No matter how much they try to regulate it, they will never be able to get back their once healthy body. They wish they’d been given an alternative immediate affirmation of their misconception that they were overweight. They wish the doctors had told them no.

Now replace “65 pounds” with “trans”. That’s what this feels like.
***

OP posts:
New posts on this thread. Refresh page
Smallblanket · 13/11/2019 20:12

We have to safeguard them, when their distress means they are not able to make informed, objective and calm decisions about their future.

Why aren't the medical professionals safeguarding them? - all I can see is cheerleading

Ali1cedowntherabbithole · 12/11/2019 21:32

Sometimes it helps to be really clear about what is involved with these vulnerable young people.

The surgery here includes castrating young males and removing young women’s breasts.

The hormones taken by distressed, dysmorphic young people will make them infertile and may shorten their lives.

Baldly, the consequences can be catastrophic. And vulnerable young men and women deserve better. We have to safeguard them, when their distress means they are not able to make informed, objective and calm decisions about their future.

NotBadConsidering · 12/11/2019 20:39

I did not say surgery cannot be lethal. Any surgery comes with risks, just as (to a lesser extent) any medicine does. But we aren't talking 1 in 4 are we?

Firstly, 1 in 4 is the lifetime risk of mortality and second, morbidity and mortality rates don’t have to match absolutely perfectly to make the analogy worthwhile. The point of the analogy is everyone would be rightly horrified if children with anorexia nervosa were allowed to dictate the terms of their treatment but for children with gender identity issues it’s deemed completely fine.

Goosefoot · 12/11/2019 20:08

My point is that although I can see where the analogy is coming from, it minimises the risks of anorexia. A 25% death rate is terrifying and this is why extremely restrictive and aggressive interventions like forced nasogastric feeding are viewed as justifiable. I don't think the comparison holds.

I think though that what concerns many is that while the interventions for kids identified as trans may not have that kind of short term numbers associated with them, what about down the line? There are very serious outcomes that may affect just as many people if we look 20 years down the line, including an earlier death, maybe a lot earlier. In every case you are probably going to have significant negative health outcomes in the longer term.

It's easy to not give those weight because we don't see them right away, that's how our minds assess risk. But what if 25% of kids that have these interventions die 20 years early? How do we count that in terms of seriousness?

Goosefoot · 12/11/2019 20:03

I think it's a useful comparison, obviously it's a different illness and so there are differences.

But it does make us ask the question, why with the one do we realise that self-perception and attitude to our own body can be inaccurate and related to some sort of unhealthy or even disordered thought process that needs to be addressed, while denying that possibility with sex dysphoria.

It's also worthwhile because I think both are related in some instances to the same people, teen girls (mainly) who are so uncomfortable with the changes of puberty that they are willing to go far to shut them down, be that through starving themselves or surgery and hormones.

Waitrosescheapestvodka · 12/11/2019 18:52

@Themyscira

Admittedly a slight contradiction there! Not sure on the need to be abusive, though.

Saying that surgery isn't lethal isn't quite the same as saying "no person ever dies from surgery complications, ever". I'd say eating food is not lethal, but death from anaphylactic shock happens. I was speaking generally.

Not eating though is most definitely lethal, and not eating for a sustained period is lethal for everyone. At it's more severe end treatment for eating disorders is directly life saving.

My point is that although I can see where the analogy is coming from, it minimises the risks of anorexia. A 25% death rate is terrifying and this is why extremely restrictive and aggressive interventions like forced nasogastric feeding are viewed as justifiable. I don't think the comparison holds.

Ali1cedowntherabbithole · 12/11/2019 17:38

It's a good analogy and shows the contrast in how eating disorders and body dysmorphia are tackled versus the completely uncritical approach in transgenderism and in dealing with children who are distressed and obsessed with the gendered expectations around their bodies.

This. I've also posted before about people with body dysmorphia and unrealistic expectations being referred for psychological support instead of plastic surgery, even (actually especially) when they have said they will end their lives without said surgery.

So why are people with dysmorphia around their sexual organs not given the same support?

WomanBornNotWorn · 12/11/2019 15:33

ArnoldWhatshisknickers I read that the Thai government changed their laws as a reaction to Jackie Green bring taken there for that surgery.

Goosefoot · 12/11/2019 14:09

There is a comment somewhere below about how FWR seems to have an exceptional number lot of women who have had body /gender hatred problems

I wonder if this is because women who have had this experience in childhood or adolescence tend to twi very quickly to the problems with the way experts are dealing with kids and adolescent girls.

I would say that it is probably true that deep loathing of the body may be relatively rare, but I think that it's just very very common for adolescent girls to feel uncomfortable, embarrassed, and scared about the changes of adolescence. That's exaggerated by the ramped up emotions found in kids of that age, about all kinds of issues.

Themyscira · 12/11/2019 14:01

For anyone who missed @Waitrosescheapestvodka's blatant lies on the previous page, here's the quotes:

"Self-starvation can be lethal. Taking hormones and surgery isn't." (11:38)

"I did not say surgery cannot be lethal." (12:55)

Fuck off with your gaslighting.

Themyscira · 12/11/2019 13:52

Oh so that's ok? Collateral damage of children and young people is perfectly fine if the percentage is small enough? How many children shall we sacrifice this year?

Waitrosescheapestvodka · 12/11/2019 12:55

I did not say surgery cannot be lethal. Any surgery comes with risks, just as (to a lesser extent) any medicine does. But we aren't talking 1 in 4 are we?

ArnoldWhatshisknickers · 12/11/2019 11:51

Did you seriously just suggest surgery can't be lethal?

You are aware that at least one XX trans person has died as a direct result of phaloplasty surgery?

Are you not aware all surgery comes with a risk of infection and reaction to anaesthetic? That it is never 100% safe?

I can see I need to tell my own story again.

I had a routine biopsy. I picked up an infection during surgery. My leg swelled to twice its normal size. The infection spread down to almost my knee and up to my navel. The wound site was black, rotten, blistered. I was rushed back to hospital, drip fed bucket loads of antibiotics. Had the rotten bit cut away leaving a wound large enough to fit my fist in which took four months to heal. It took three years to rebuild my quadracep muscle.

I was lucky I didn't die nor lost my leg. This was the most minor of surgery. The completely unnecessary surgeries performed on 'trans' people, some as young as 13, are far more major and far more risky.

Surgery can't be lethal my arse.

NotBadConsidering · 12/11/2019 11:51

www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/m/pubmed/21364939/?i=2&from=sex%20reassignment%20surgery/mortality

RESULTS: The overall mortality for sex-reassigned persons was higher during follow-up (aHR 2.8; 95% CI 1.8-4.3) than for controls of the same birth sex, particularly death from suicide (aHR 19.1; 95% CI 5.8-62.9). Sex-reassigned persons also had an increased risk for suicide attempts (aHR 4.9; 95% CI 2.9-8.5) and psychiatric inpatient care (aHR 2.8; 95% CI 2.0-3.9). Comparisons with controls matched on reassigned sex yielded similar results. Female-to-males, but not male-to-females, had a higher risk for criminal convictions than their respective birth sex controls.

CONCLUSIONS: Persons with transsexualism, after sex reassignment, have considerably higher risks for mortality, suicidal behaviour, and psychiatric morbidity than the general population. Our findings suggest that sex reassignment, although alleviating gender dysphoria, may not suffice as treatment for transsexualism, and should inspire improved psychiatric and somatic care after sex reassignment for this patient group

LiterallyProblematic · 12/11/2019 11:49

Some people will have life long eating disorders.

NotBadConsidering · 12/11/2019 11:46

It’s enforced in the sense that you say to children they have to have therapy. If they are suicidal and can’t be kept safe by those around them then they can also be sectioned for severe depression with suicidal ideation.

Taking hormones leads to infertility, sexual dysfunction (inability to orgasm) significant increased cardiovascular disease risk (stroke etc) and increased risk of certain cancers.

Surgery results in permanency of the problems started by hormones and recurrent wound infections, necrosis, and turns a patient into lifelong medical patients.

These two options may be acceptable if there was any evidence they lead to positive long term mental health outcomes in children. But there isn’t.

So why should they be done again?

ChattyLion · 12/11/2019 11:42

That OP is absolutely chilling

Waitrosescheapestvodka · 12/11/2019 11:38

the enforced treatment is psychological therapy and avoidance of hormones that result in permanent physical changes. It’s not the treatment they want - just like anorexics don’t want nasogastric feeding - but it’s the best treatment for them.

How is this treatment enforced? People with anorexia can be detained under the MHA for treatment because anorexia is defined as a mental disorder within the act. GD isn't.

Self-starvation can be lethal. Taking hormones and surgery isn't.

NotBadConsidering · 12/11/2019 11:28

Enforced treatment happens when there is a clear risk to life,

• Trans kids: high risk of suicide (so we are told)
• the enforced treatment is psychological therapy and avoidance of hormones that result in permanent physical changes. It’s not the treatment they want - just like anorexics don’t want nasogastric feeding - but it’s the best treatment for them.

Children with distress about their sex: “if I don’t get the treatment I want I’ll kill myself”
Doctors in gender clinics “Ok sure, that seems a reasonable request”

Children with anorexia nervosa: “I want to be allowed to starve myself even if it risks death”
Doctors in Eating Disorder Units: “Yeah no, sorry, not having that”.

If doctors didn’t protect children with anorexia nervosa from themselves it would be a disaster but at Gender clinics that doesn’t seem to happen.

Waitrosescheapestvodka · 12/11/2019 11:17

There is no comparison. 1 in 4 people with anorexia die from the disorder. Before this, they live a miserable life. Enforced treatment happens when there is a clear risk to life, as a MH nurse I have met people with BMIs in single figures.

For many people living in their perceived gender eases their distress without putting them at risk of death.

jellyfrizz · 12/11/2019 10:27

What? That sounds exactly like the experience of most women, especially as we go through adolescence and come to terms with how the world treats us

I don't think it is remotely the experience of most women- it might be the experience of women who post on FWR but I've never personally come across the sort of loathing of one's body which is taken as normal on FWR.

The PP specifically stated adolescence. Research by the Girl Guides backs this up:

www.girlguiding.org.uk/globalassets/docs-and-resources/research-and-campaigns/girls-attitudes-survey-2018.pdf

See section on Appearance pressures.

41% of 17-21 year old girls are "not happy" with the way they look. Lucky you if you and all the women you know were in the 59%.

Also, note that 17-21 was the age that girls were MOST unhappy with their bodies, at an age where they would (or v. shortly) have surgery as an available option.

ArnoldWhatshisknickers · 12/11/2019 10:02

Yep, though in fairness to the Thais they no longer perform genital mutilation surgery on such young people. In fact I think I read recently that they've upped the minimum age to 21. No doubt someone will know if that's correct or not.

Themyscira · 12/11/2019 09:57

16th birthday, even.

ArnoldWhatshisknickers · 12/11/2019 09:30

Can I please correct the claim that children are not having surgery?

It may be true of the UK but certainly isn't in the US where girls as young as 13 have had their perfectly healthy breasts removed and 15 year olds can sign up for surgery without parental consent in the state of Oregon.

Jazz Jennings had genital surgery at 17 and lest we forget Jackie Green was just 16 when castrated in Thailand.

MIdgebabe · 12/11/2019 09:29

There is a comment somewhere below about how FWR seems to have an exceptional number lot of women who have had body /gender hatred problems

Isn't it funny that women who have experienced the greater levels of gender distress are also the ones that tend to reject patriarchy ? I would be as bold as to suggest that is a causal relationship.