AIBU to think women should not be banned from Social media for asking the question - Thread 3

[Thewithesarehere]

Many women have been suspended from sm for asking the question:

“Do you believe that male sexed people should be allowed access to changing rooms and showers for female sexed people and teenagers?”
Seems like a perfectly reasonable question which we should be allowed to ask.

Let’s vote with our AIBU.

No, but if you have no understanding of why people do it then what do you expect? That if you just scream and stamp your feet long enough that transwomen are going to be like shit, She's right. Let's use the males?

Well you yourself said that after enough public meltdowns you just have to give in and get on with it. If your step child’s public meltdowns led to you facilitating the use of opposite sex spaces, maybe if enough women have public meltdowns then transwomen will relent also.

That if you just scream and stamp your feet long enough that transwomen are going to be like shit, She's right. Let's use the males?

No. I'm not screaming and stamping my feet. I'm pointing out that no decent male person would want to invade female spaces which are intended for women's safety, privacy and dignity.

It's crystal clear to everyone that no one respects the feelings, comfort and concerns of women and girls, and that men and many pandering, antifeminist women think we should simply devote our entire lives to supporting male people in everything they want.

But if people think that women who disagree with this sexism are going to shut up about it, they can think again.

I think we're done.

@NotBadConsidering

No, but if you have no understanding of why people do it then what do you expect? That if you just scream and stamp your feet long enough that transwomen are going to be like shit, She's right. Let's use the males?

Well you yourself said that after enough public meltdowns you just have to give in and get on with it. If your step child’s public meltdowns led to you facilitating the use of opposite sex spaces, maybe if enough women have public meltdowns then transwomen will relent also.

Lol. Go for it. If you think having an emotional meltdown in public, working yourself into hysterics until you're sick, then sitting non responsive for the rest of the day sounds like a good time, knock yourself out. Honestly, for all this talk about empathy...

@Ereshkigalangcleg

That if you just scream and stamp your feet long enough that transwomen are going to be like shit, She's right. Let's use the males?

No. I'm not screaming and stamping my feet. I'm pointing out that no decent male person would want to invade female spaces which are intended for women's safety, privacy and dignity.

It's crystal clear to everyone that no one respects the feelings, comfort and concerns of women and girls, and that men and many pandering, antifeminist women think we should simply devote our entire lives to supporting male people in everything they want.

But if people think that women who disagree with this sexism are going to shut up about it, they can think again.

I think we're done.

Nobody is asking you to support anything. You don't have to like it. All anybody is asking is that you mind your own business.

No, I don’t think it’s a good idea at all. But you seem to view objections as women “screaming and stamping your feet”. I was facetiously pointing out how when males object everyone relents, but when women do it it’s screaming, stamping, and hysterics.

You lack empathy. You lack empathy for all those who have been victims of abuse. You ask for real world experience, and ignore the multiple examples of males using trans ideology to abuse women and girls. There’s a whole thread recording these incidents. You acknowledge that some are men with fetishes but cannot explain how anyone is meant to tell the difference. You say you’re happy for your female children to shower next to transwomen, but conveniently avoid whether you think this includes the ones you called men with fetishes. You can’t explain why we have sex segregated spaces in the first place, which would demonstrate just a basic level of empathy.

And you think that women saying no isn’t going to work, and women having meltdowns in public isn’t productive either. You come across as gloating that it’s battle lost and everyone should just suck it up and seem surprised when there are people who will not let that happen. You should probably prepare yourself and your stepchild for the possibility that you won’t always get it your own way on this.

@NotBadConsidering

No, I don’t think it’s a good idea at all. But you seem to view objections as women “screaming and stamping your feet”. I was facetiously pointing out how when males object everyone relents, but when women do it it’s screaming, stamping, and hysterics.

You lack empathy. You lack empathy for all those who have been victims of abuse. You ask for real world experience, and ignore the multiple examples of males using trans ideology to abuse women and girls. There’s a whole thread recording these incidents. You acknowledge that some are men with fetishes but cannot explain how anyone is meant to tell the difference. You say you’re happy for your female children to shower next to transwomen, but conveniently avoid whether you think this includes the ones you called men with fetishes. You can’t explain why we have sex segregated spaces in the first place, which would demonstrate just a basic level of empathy.

And you think that women saying no isn’t going to work, and women having meltdowns in public isn’t productive either. You come across as gloating that it’s battle lost and everyone should just suck it up and seem surprised when there are people who will not let that happen. You should probably prepare yourself and your stepchild for the possibility that you won’t always get it your own way on this.

"Won't let it happen."

But it's already happened. Past tense.

I'll show empathy when you do.

I do have empathy and showed you empathy earlier in the thread. I expressed my concern that you hold a transmedicalist view which comes in for abuse. I also can fully empathise with dealing with highly distressed teenagers, both personally and professionally.

I am also concerned about your step child’s health, as I pointed out a few pages ago that the measurements you gave give a BMI that is underweight. Knowing that this person has been on puberty blockers and is now on cross sex hormones I expressed concern about bone health leading to being underweight and think you should advise your stepchild to seek medical support for this. I also expressed concern about how evidence is being released all the time - hugely increased risk of breast cancer in males on oestrogen was my example - which has come after your stepchild was commenced on oestrogen. I have concern that adults are not being told these things.

I have expressed concern and empathy for you, your situation and your stepchild. You have expressed zero empathy for women and girls and the right to privacy, dignity, and safety. You’ve ignored all examples of harm that has been done.

And again, you’re set on the idea that this is a done deal and any attempts to regain some rights for women and girls is futile because it’s past tense. If you had any empathy you would acknowledge that this can’t be set in the past tense while the people you call “men with fetishes” are now using the same reasons you use to justify your stepchild’s use of opposite sex facilities.

@NotBadConsidering

I do have empathy and showed you empathy earlier in the thread. I expressed my concern that you hold a transmedicalist view which comes in for abuse. I also can fully empathise with dealing with highly distressed teenagers, both personally and professionally.

I am also concerned about your step child’s health, as I pointed out a few pages ago that the measurements you gave give a BMI that is underweight. Knowing that this person has been on puberty blockers and is now on cross sex hormones I expressed concern about bone health leading to being underweight and think you should advise your stepchild to seek medical support for this. I also expressed concern about how evidence is being released all the time - hugely increased risk of breast cancer in males on oestrogen was my example - which has come after your stepchild was commenced on oestrogen. I have concern that adults are not being told these things.

I have expressed concern and empathy for you, your situation and your stepchild. You have expressed zero empathy for women and girls and the right to privacy, dignity, and safety. You’ve ignored all examples of harm that has been done.

And again, you’re set on the idea that this is a done deal and any attempts to regain some rights for women and girls is futile because it’s past tense. If you had any empathy you would acknowledge that this can’t be set in the past tense while the people you call “men with fetishes” are now using the same reasons you use to justify your stepchild’s use of opposite sex facilities.

I ignore a lot of things simply because they're not asked with good intentions. Let's just be clear, this ain't my first rodeo and I know a dead end when I see one and don't waste my time entertaining it.

Now, let's get one thing clear. I think the trans lobby have, and continue to do, a lot of damage. I hate that they had gender dysphoria deregulated as a mental disorder. As any parent who has had a child with genuine GD can tell you, it is very much a mental disorder, and a very deliberating one at that. That's why none of these solutions are going to work. I'm not saying it to be goady, I'm saying it because there needs to be some acknowledgement that even if we woke up tomorrow with everywhere having a third option, laws to prevent males from entering female toilets, etc, it still would not work. Those with genuine gd will still use the female facilities because no matter how great, kind and logical you are, you cannot reason with a mental disorder. They have no more choice in it than an anorexic does in starving themselves.

As for other issues, I think the trans lobby are doing a great disservice in shutting down research into newly emerging trends. Gender dysphoria is one thing. There's always been those with GD and there always will be, but I think there does need to be a certian level of research into two specific groups: the huge boom in teenage girls seeking treatment and middle aged males who until a set moment have lived very full and accomplished lives as stereotypical, usually heterosexual men. There is something social going on here that needs exploration, and I think it's a shame that research isn't being permitted.

Do I think there is a level of fetishism/predatory and attention/control seeking behavior that has infiltrated transness? Absolutely. Do I think it's a huge problem? Absolutely not. It's a tiny minority of what is already a tiny minority, and if these people are going to do it, they're going to it regardless of how many GD transwomen we kick out of bathrooms. That's why I said from my very first post that I believe it's important for people, including 'terfs', should be allowed to keep their voices so these sort of violations can continue to be called out and not just buried in the name of ideology.

Those with genuine gd will still use the female facilities because no matter how great, kind and logical you are, you cannot reason with a mental disorder. They have no more choice in it than an anorexic does in starving themselves.

This is completely flawed. There are people with genuine dysphoria who use the facilities of their sex. To say it cannot be reasoned with is to ignore the fact that there are sufferers of GD who have come to terms with reality and put that into practice.

It’s also remarkable that you draw parallels with anorexia. We do not allow children with anorexia to starve themselves. We admit them, contain them and restrain them if necessary (legally not literally). We do this so treatment - feeding and psychotherapy - can be initiated to help a child come to terms with the fact that their body is healthy and does not need to be starved. It’s the exact opposite of what happens with children with GD, who make threats about their bodies, are certain their bodies are wrong, but instead they are told by adults that they are in fact right and they need to embark on medical treatments. To draw an analogy with anorexia, it would be as if a starving teenager is given appetite suppressants and calorie restriction to help them achieve their goal.

If children who had such distressing GD were treated like the anorexia patients - admitted, supported, intense therapy, prevention of harm, help accepting the realities of life - then they would end up in a much better place.

Do I think there is a level of fetishism/predatory and attention/control seeking behavior that has infiltrated transness? Absolutely. Do I think it's a huge problem? Absolutely not. It's a tiny minority of what is already a tiny minority, and if these people are going to do it, they're going to it regardless of how many GD transwomen we kick out of bathrooms.

You say it’s a tiny majority of a tiny majority: how many cases does it have to be before you would be concerned? You’re using the “rapists gonna rape” argument. The fact “rapists gonna rape” is the reason we segregate by sex in the first place. It reduces the size of the loophole. It doesn’t close it completely but it shouldn’t be widened. Your using the very reason why spaces should remain single sex to explain that it doesn’t matter if they become increasingly mixed sex. It makes zero sense.

And these predatory men will find it easier to perpetrate these crimes if it becomes unacceptable and/or illegal for women and girls to challenge the presence of a male in their space at that time. At this very moment, if I see a male following any of my DDs into a single sex space I will challenge them. The more that self-ID is perpetuated and challenges to such are shouted down as bigotry, the less able people become in challenging behaviour they may see as inappropriate. No one can explain how anyone is meant to tell the difference between someone with genuine GD and a predatory male. If preventing males, regardless of their genuine GD status or not helps reduce problems then I cannot see how anyone with any empathy would object to that.

To stop predatory men attacking women and girls isn’t easy, but I’m damned sure we shouldn’t be making it easier.

@NotBadConsidering

Those with genuine gd will still use the female facilities because no matter how great, kind and logical you are, you cannot reason with a mental disorder. They have no more choice in it than an anorexic does in starving themselves.

This is completely flawed. There are people with genuine dysphoria who use the facilities of their sex. To say it cannot be reasoned with is to ignore the fact that there are sufferers of GD who have come to terms with reality and put that into practice.

It’s also remarkable that you draw parallels with anorexia. We do not allow children with anorexia to starve themselves. We admit them, contain them and restrain them if necessary (legally not literally). We do this so treatment - feeding and psychotherapy - can be initiated to help a child come to terms with the fact that their body is healthy and does not need to be starved. It’s the exact opposite of what happens with children with GD, who make threats about their bodies, are certain their bodies are wrong, but instead they are told by adults that they are in fact right and they need to embark on medical treatments. To draw an analogy with anorexia, it would be as if a starving teenager is given appetite suppressants and calorie restriction to help them achieve their goal.

If children who had such distressing GD were treated like the anorexia patients - admitted, supported, intense therapy, prevention of harm, help accepting the realities of life - then they would end up in a much better place.

Do I think there is a level of fetishism/predatory and attention/control seeking behavior that has infiltrated transness? Absolutely. Do I think it's a huge problem? Absolutely not. It's a tiny minority of what is already a tiny minority, and if these people are going to do it, they're going to it regardless of how many GD transwomen we kick out of bathrooms.

You say it’s a tiny majority of a tiny majority: how many cases does it have to be before you would be concerned? You’re using the “rapists gonna rape” argument. The fact “rapists gonna rape” is the reason we segregate by sex in the first place. It reduces the size of the loophole. It doesn’t close it completely but it shouldn’t be widened. Your using the very reason why spaces should remain single sex to explain that it doesn’t matter if they become increasingly mixed sex. It makes zero sense.

And these predatory men will find it easier to perpetrate these crimes if it becomes unacceptable and/or illegal for women and girls to challenge the presence of a male in their space at that time. At this very moment, if I see a male following any of my DDs into a single sex space I will challenge them. The more that self-ID is perpetuated and challenges to such are shouted down as bigotry, the less able people become in challenging behaviour they may see as inappropriate. No one can explain how anyone is meant to tell the difference between someone with genuine GD and a predatory male. If preventing males, regardless of their genuine GD status or not helps reduce problems then I cannot see how anyone with any empathy would object to that.

To stop predatory men attacking women and girls isn’t easy, but I’m damned sure we shouldn’t be making it easier.

We did comit, restrain and contain. To this day I'm paying for psychotherapy. This is the treatment medical professionals recommend.

And tbh, I don't know what I'm fighting about. Unless you looked really, really close you wouldn't guess with my sd because she passes exceedingly well, so she is unlikely to make anybody feel unsafe. I don't think mtf who don't pass belong in female spaces. I feel sorry for those with genuine gd who didn't have the opportunity to transition before male puberty wrecked their bodies, but I do believe girls need protection from the likes of the Yaniv's of the world.

And tbh, I don't know what I'm fighting about. Unless you looked really, really close you wouldn't guess with my sd because she passes exceedingly well, so she is unlikely to make anybody feel unsafe. I don't think mtf who don't pass belong in female spaces. I feel sorry for those with genuine gd who didn't have the opportunity to transition before male puberty wrecked their bodies, but I do believe girls need protection from the likes of the Yaniv's of the world.

I don’t know what you’re fighting for either. You’re simultaneously saying that women and girls should just accept that there’s no going back and males will be in female spaces and it’s a done deal, while at the same time saying there needs to be protection from the likes of Yaniv. So do you or don’t you think there is still something worth fighting for?

You’re saying only those that pass who aren’t a threat should be allowed in female spaces. This is gatekeeping which TRAs violently rail against, and immeasurable, as there is no way of knowing if a male is a threat from their outward appearance.

And you feel sorry for male people who didn’t get access to puberty blockers, even though this means they have fully developed genitalia, normal sexual function, fertility, normal bone density, and as such have a physically healthier body for the long term (depending on use of oestrogen) and have been able to have adult experiences. You see it as male puberty that has wrecked their bodies, but can’t see the wrecked body of your stepchild, a body that has been arrested at the stage of a 14 year old and never matured beyond that, and is now medicalised for life with a myriad of complications from hormone treatments, both known and unknown.

I think there’s something immeasurably sad in the accounts of a child put on powerful, off-label, experimental drugs that are highly likely to cause them lifelong side effects, and the adverse effects of which aren’t yet fully known. I think it’s an absolute tragedy that the treatment of severe and persistent gender dysphoria in young people is so severely limited that it amounts to, as PPs have noted, the equivalent of telling an anorexic they’re right after all, their body is grossly fat and here are some diet pills to make them thinner. If we were treating adolescents with anorexia like that, there would be a public outcry. I can however completely understand why a parent would grasp at whatever treatment the so-called professionals were offering when faced with a child so resolute their sex was “wrong”. But as more and more evidence comes to light about the possible long-term harms of such drugs and equally about the lack of any meaningful information given to previous patients about those harms as they did become known, I would struggle as a parent not to feel increasingly angry with the medical profession.

FastedBrownie, as one stepmum to another, and asking in genuine good faith and empathy: does the growing evidence of the harm that PBs do long-term concern you? Do you have any moments where you worry that you may have sacrificed your child’s physical health for their mental health?

And a more personal question, which I fully understand you may not wish to answer or even know the answer to, if the situation hasn’t arisen: you say your SD is an adult now, and passes well. How would they cope these days if they were misgendered? Are they more sanguine about being biologically male these days, or would it still traumatise them mentally?

@OnlyTheLangoftheTitBerg

I think there’s something immeasurably sad in the accounts of a child put on powerful, off-label, experimental drugs that are highly likely to cause them lifelong side effects, and the adverse effects of which aren’t yet fully known. I think it’s an absolute tragedy that the treatment of severe and persistent gender dysphoria in young people is so severely limited that it amounts to, as PPs have noted, the equivalent of telling an anorexic they’re right after all, their body is grossly fat and here are some diet pills to make them thinner. If we were treating adolescents with anorexia like that, there would be a public outcry. I can however completely understand why a parent would grasp at whatever treatment the so-called professionals were offering when faced with a child so resolute their sex was “wrong”. But as more and more evidence comes to light about the possible long-term harms of such drugs and equally about the lack of any meaningful information given to previous patients about those harms as they did become known, I would struggle as a parent not to feel increasingly angry with the medical profession.

FastedBrownie, as one stepmum to another, and asking in genuine good faith and empathy: does the growing evidence of the harm that PBs do long-term concern you? Do you have any moments where you worry that you may have sacrificed your child’s physical health for their mental health?

And a more personal question, which I fully understand you may not wish to answer or even know the answer to, if the situation hasn’t arisen: you say your SD is an adult now, and passes well. How would they cope these days if they were misgendered? Are they more sanguine about being biologically male these days, or would it still traumatise them mentally?

Definitely more sanguine. I think that comes with maturity and the fact that the outside now looks like it does in her head. But we never were science deniers with the fact that she was born biologically male and will die biologically male in the first place.

As I've said multiple times, I certainly have issues with the trans camp and the way they treat others both in and out of it, but when you have a severely ill child you try whatever you can to relieve their distress. And it definitely did do that. Do I have concerns? Of course, but it was one of those things where the benefits (in our case) outweighed the risks. Sd still goes to counselling once a fortnight, we have bone density checks bi-annually, and because we were in the sweet spot of being right on the cusp on ts3 when blockers were started, so there is a decent level of sexual development. Not to a post-pubescent level (though I can't say that I've looked recently), but enough that a satisfying sexual relationship can be maintained, but it's only been in the last year or so since weaning off blockers that this has even been of even remote interest. Like with other health risks, all we can do from this point is deal with them if/when they occur.

Thank you for replying.

@OnlyTheLangoftheTitBerg

Thank you for replying.

I'm more than happy to answer questions, which is why I've asked mnhq not to delete posts or strike people on my behalf. I honestly believe that I made the right descion for my family and child at the time, so I'm not overly sensitive about it or to the judgement of others. If I think a post is made in bad faith, I just ignore it and move on.

fasted I appreciate you answering questions

Did they tell you during the treatment of your child that something like 80 percent if children do come to terms with their bodies after puberty. So that by blocking puberty that actually prevents that from happening? And that blockers are the first step and not a pause. They prevent the one thing that would help in 80 percent of cases.

Obviously you could all only go by what the drs etc told you, but given the recent findings and court judgment, I'm curious as to whether that was something they did actually tell you when you were making the decisions. Did they ensure you were fully informed In that way?

Obviously you don't have to answer this.

It is a genuine question I honestly am not having a go. Alot of our concerns are whether parents are fully informed. So it would be good to hear at the very least in you case that you were.

Nobody is asking you to support anything. You don't have to like it. All anybody is asking is that you mind your own business.

It is my business, and I'll continue to speak about it. Your expectations are not reasonable and as other pp have pointed out, your motivations here are very confused, and your gloating is clear to see. I imagine you have all sorts of feelings about what's happened to your relative and whether it's actually right. That's not my business. Males feeling entitled to ignore women's boundaries is.

I don’t know what you’re fighting for either. You’re simultaneously saying that women and girls should just accept that there’s no going back and males will be in female spaces and it’s a done deal, while at the same time saying there needs to be protection from the likes of Yaniv. So do you or don’t you think there is still something worth fighting for?

You’re saying only those that pass who aren’t a threat should be allowed in female spaces. This is gatekeeping which TRAs violently rail against, and immeasurable, as there is no way of knowing if a male is a threat from their outward appearance.

This.

@jj1968

The nature of trans identifying people seems to have changed significantly in the past 5 or so years. When the GRA was brought in 2004, it was anticipated that there would be no more than 5000 transsexuals needing to use the legislation and the tendency would be to aim for full surgical transition and many of those understand their birth sex and do not attempt to use the female single sex facilities.

This is complete nonsense. The GRA requires trans people to prove they live in the role of their aquired gender which includes using single sex spaces inline with that gender. Moreover when the 2004 act was introduced trans people who wanted medical treatment had to undergo the 'real life experience' test for two years in which they were expected to live in their aquired gender in every possible way and would be quizzed by clinicians to ensure they were using spaces inline with their gender identity.

The number of people who talk with great authority about trans issues without having even a clue about the basics because they got all their information from mumsnet and gender critical twitter is becoming astonishing. And depressing.

I got it straight from Hansard, you know, the direct record of the debates in parliament about this.

Baroness Buscombe My Lords, it gives me pleasure to make it clear straight away that in principle—I stress "in principle"—we on these Benches are supportive of the Bill. We believe it is right to confront the issues that it raises, so that changes can be made in the law to bring about great improvements in the lives of Britain's 5,000 transsexuals.

Where does it say there is a requirement for GRC applicants to use the facilities of their 'acquired gender'? They seem to mention 'discretion' and that it might be 'possible' but that is certainly not the same thing. They were also concerned about the impact of people using facilities that don't correspond with their actual sex but I'm not sure they were resolved.

The government debate reflected very much that while it is not a legal requirement for full medical transition, it is presumed that the person will be moving towards that.

As I said, the GRA envisioned a very different image of the individuals we are discussing here.

Nowadays, it is male-bodied people who often do not suffer from any form of dysphoria, who are very happy with their male bodies (indeed, they like to make all sorts of threats using their penises and violence) yet claim that they are women and are fully entitled to the rights and protections (and even awards) afforded to women.

They are not.

Maybe you should try reading Hansard to get a bit more background to the legal stuff?

Unfortunately "hard cases make bad laws"
Women's safe places are there to protect them from male violence. Transwomen are male and all evidence shows that they are just as liable to exhibit such violence as any other males.

@Whatwouldscullydo

fasted I appreciate you answering questions

Did they tell you during the treatment of your child that something like 80 percent if children do come to terms with their bodies after puberty. So that by blocking puberty that actually prevents that from happening? And that blockers are the first step and not a pause. They prevent the one thing that would help in 80 percent of cases.

Obviously you could all only go by what the drs etc told you, but given the recent findings and court judgment, I'm curious as to whether that was something they did actually tell you when you were making the decisions. Did they ensure you were fully informed In that way?

Obviously you don't have to answer this.

I need to precaution this question with the fact that our engagement with medical professionals in regards with gender dysphoria started almost 15 years ago, and the culture around transgenderism was very different back then.

But to put it bluntly, I don't remember if 'they' told me as such, but it was something that I was aware of because another family member had gone through childhood gender dysphoria and outgrew it around the 14/15 age mark, but one big difference between the two cases was how acutely body focused sd's gd was. For Sd it was never about clothes, toys, names (sd still goes by birthname to this day). The focus from a young age for Sd was always very much on how her physical body was wrong, where with relative using a more masculine name, wearing more masculine clothing and hair was enough to soothe the dysphoria until it could be outgrown.

Exactly. The fact that people have tried to sensitively treat males with dysphoria who superficially pass as female, has opened up women's spaces to the "Yaniv's of the world". Because it's very difficult to make policy around it which can separate these two groups.

Thank you for answering and for continuing to engage Fasted.

It does seem that your step child has a very complex mental health history. You say that they acknowledge they are still male as they understand they cannot change sex. They understand that they should not skate against females because they understand their advantages (or is that you understand and they dropped out of competition for other reasons). Yet, that they will never accept that they should not be considered male for other aspects in life.

Do you believe that your child should be able to sit on a policy panel in a designated female position to discuss the health and well-being of women and girls?

I ask this because I have not seen any indication that the far wider and possible future issues of your child’s transition have been addressed. Am I to take it that you would be fine with that because of your belief that prizes for women and girls should include your child?

Thank you. I'm guessing that the waiting lists weren't quite so long back then. And this rapid increase in girls wishing to transition is very recent. Unfortunately despite promising a review into the 4000 percent increase in girls, its never happened. Its very likely there are differing reasons between girls and boys and the chain of events that lead to the problems but we Unfortunately do not know what that is. I dont see how it's helpful for this to be ignored and everyone treated the same the same way you agree its not helpful to remove the mental health classifications.

Theres no shame in mental health problems its not a value judgement ans ultimately we all want want same thing here and that is for well researched , evidence based, health care with follow ups, proper documentation and evidence. That means looking at all.aspects of the body and mind and mental state .