All humans generally have both estrogen and testosterone naturally produced in their bodies.
The quantities you are taking are not naturally produced in your body. You are not ‘replacing’ estrogen at the levels your body ‘needs’. You have undertaken a decades long cosmetic procedure, it is not a replacement programme. And sure by now, your body might need that exogenous chemical, still doesn’t make your body female though.
Perhaps, it should be called a supplement programme? But that doesn’t fit with the whole narrative that male people have changed sex.
Just like it doesn’t fit with the behaviour of using words used to describe distinct female body processes for something that a male person or group of male people have decided they want to acquire. ‘Acquired’ meaning their bodies are not going anywhere through that process at all, but ‘near enough is good enough’ seems to be the key.
Just like a male person suppressing male puberty then goes through nothing like a ‘female puberty.’ A male person cannot have a female puberty. If they take puberty blockers from the start of puberty and then estrogen, they simply have a male estrogen driven puberty. Which is not a ‘female puberty.’ But near enough is apparently good enough for any male person who uses that language.
Just like male people cycling hormones are not having anything like a ‘period’. They are not having a menstrual cycle, they are simply cycling hormones artificially in their body and calling it a ‘period’, because they want to use female language. Again near enough is apparently good enough for any male person who uses that language.
Just like any male using the term ‘menopause’. Again near enough is apparently good enough for any male person who uses that language.
Each of the terms I mention, female puberty, periods, menopause have specific meaning. They are not terms that a male person can claim to have some symptoms of (even completely artificially created through hormone control) so therefore they can just claim that is what they are going through. That is the point many of us have tried to point out over and over.
And even the claim that a male person undergoing a particular ‘protocol’ means that male person has then got the exact same breast physiology and the endocrine system to control the function of that body part to ‘feed’ an infant. No. The male breast will never ‘mature’ exactly like a female breast. It will mature only to the point the male breast can mature and no further.
But in this case, ‘near enough’ is putting an infant at risk of harm. Even a male medical specialist who transitioned himself declared this was wrong and he wouldn’t be making that decision knowing it could put his infant child at great risk for unknown future complications.
Of course, this is where that entire behaviour pattern of ‘near enough is good enough’ has given the group of male people who do make the decision, this false belief that they are ‘breastfeeding’ an infant. when no, they are merely feeding the secretions from their male breast to an infant. Hugely limited in quantity, and not producing staged milk or specifically tailored to that child. Because they lack the body parts for that refinement.
Yet … near enough is good enough, eh?
Everytime a male person claims to be experiencing a specific female body process when they cannot and are not, they are stating clearly that they have simply acquired medical terminology, formal or informal, for themselves and repurposed it.
Yes, your body is processing estrogen, some of it naturally produced. It does so because of your deliberate decision to remove the body part needed to produce testosterone, that estrogen is what your body is using to survive.
If a male person were going on ‘HRT’, that would be them taking testosterone because they chose to have their primary testosterone production body part removed. Or it is not working through disease or injury. Even for extreme body modification to support an identity. Yet male people claim the term ‘HRT’ for artificially supplementing estrogen at levels their body was never going to produce naturally if it was in good health. So, it is a false use of the term.
Of course, you need to be clear to any medical staff that you are a male person taking estrogen and any other chemicals, and that you don’t produce testosterone from testes and that you haven’t for decades. That is your medical history and it is vital information to have for making medical decisions for you and a medical team.
However, the medical record should indicate you are still male, not female. In surgery, your medical team should have made all the calculations based on someone being male but having no ability to produce male ranges of testosterone, taking exogenous estrogen in a dosage range greater than the male range for decades. No poster is denying this. It is fact. Of course all human bodies naturally produce some of both hormones. That is not being denied at all.
What posters are pointing out is that none of the medical processes any male person undertakes makes them female.
That male people acquiring female language to describe some symptoms, even completely artificially induced symptoms, does not mean that male person is materially experiencing what they have labelled the experience. Perhaps they are using those words to make themselves feel good, perhaps they don’t understand that they are behaving in a way that is misogynistic in doing so. Perhaps they have told themselves it is harmless to anyone else that they use these words and it means their mental health is so much better for it. Whatever the reason, the outcome is still the same.
Male people are not experiencing the processes they use the terms for. They might be experiencing some symptoms that are similar but this ‘near enough is good enough’ approach from those male people is harmful to female people collectively.
If a male person such as the one mentioned who recorded staff have their medical file changed to ‘F’ they are providing inaccurate information.