Thank you Stella O'Malley for an excellent letter.
Thank you ByCraftyMaker for saying that you believe it's only possible to "be" transgender if you have gender dysphoria. Even though I don't believe in gender identity myself (i.e. I don't believe anyone has one), I do agree that it's a reasonable requirement. Otherwise all the AGPs and fetishists get to tag along too.
And thank you PPs for clearly articulating why a belief in gender identity can only be upheld by internalising sex-based stereotypes.
In this country, we're inconsistent when it comes to how we manage beliefs and their impact on children's bodies and lives. We ban (most) childhood FGM, yet allow circumcision. Why? Yes, circumcision is less harmful than FGM but it's still removing a part of the body in accordance with a belief, often backed up by unproven reasoning that it's apparently healthier. We allow some FGM: 16 year old females can take testosterone (if they believe they are boys), leading the clitoris to grow outside the body and most likely be permanently painful.
We should not be allowing a belief in gender identity to lead to further medical experimentation on children. We've already done enough of this.
Let's track down the 9000 ex-GIDS patients and get data on their cognitive functioning and bone health now, being clear to separate out which ones had PBs and/or cross-sex hormones and which did not. Let's compare that data to the average population at the same current age. On the assumption that most who had PBs likely also had cross-sex hormones, let's also compare the data to adults who received PBs for less time as a child, for precocious puberty, stopping at the age when puberty should be expected to start.
What's next, an experiment to give Catholic children transubstantiated wine as blood transfusions, as long as we track the results?