To think that this book should not be sold to young girls?

[WandaWomblesaurus]

twitter.com/Waterstones/status/1623584986740953091?s=20&t=WU0D0fzc6ClGJC5R-gJnuw

Waterstones tweeted celebrating a book that is about transing girls. Here is one of the illustrations from the book.

AIBU to think that this is directly promoting self harm to young vulnerable girls?

You're a liar. I did not say 5000 children were medically transitioning. I asked you to quote it. You can't, because you're lying.

We can all see it.

This Jack Turban?
medium.com/@JLCederblom/the-lukewarm-perjury-of-jack-turban-a85903109051

@TeaKlaxon No one has lied, except you.

No one has been 'caught out', except you.

No one has posted blatant falsehoods, without evidence, then tried to change the goalposts, over and over again, except you.

You are wasting your time and you are fooling no one. No one.

When a poster is trying to pick holes in stats that reveal problems with medical transitions it means that they already know that the big argument fails.

There is no justification for putting children with mental health issues on a pathway which may lead to unnecessary surgery. None. We don't do it with other mental health issues so we shouldn't do it for this.

None of these young adults will actually change sex, they are being sold a lie so the surgeries don't work on the most fundamental level.

And as for the book, well anything that gives a young mind the idea that they are in the wrong body or that their body is vile and needs modifying is nothing more than harmful propaganda.

Actually you kind of did.

First at 13.24 you said:

*'Transitioning is not new' but actual professionals in the field have made it very clear that they are alarmed by the huge explosion in numbers.

It has gone from 250 individuals a year, mostly boys, to 5000 a year, mostly girls, in the past decade.*

This says that 5000 a year are transitioning. Unless you missed off some key words about referrals.

@TeaKlaxon I think you'll find if you go back that @ClearMoth linked to the huge increase in girls transitioning, she did not state "medical transitioning" you did when you quoted that post. I cannot screen grab so have copied and pasted below for you.

• TeaKlaxon 44m ago ClearMoth 'Transitioning is not new' but actual professionals in the field have made it very clear that they are alarmed by the huge explosion in numbers. It has gone from 250 individuals a year, mostly boys, to 5000 a year, mostly girls, in the past decade. You are talking absolute bollocks. The situation is not remotely comparable, and it's horrendous that vou are so cavalier about the lives, health, happiness and safety of young girls. You're quite happy for them to be sacrificed for whatever motive it is that you have. Because it's blatantly clear that their pain is irrelevant to you.

There are not 5000 children a year medically transitioning.
Again, you're making things up.*

Then at 13.38, in response to TeaKlaxon saying there weren't 5,000 children medically transitioning, you said "I'm not making it up".

"why it's so very, very important that we throw away all our notions of harm reduction"

It's not. We should absolutely pursue harm reduction. That includes reducing harm to severely gender dysphoric youth who are likely to experience extreme trauma at going through puberty as their natal sex and likely to have a much harder time transitioning later on.

"why it's so very, very important we throw away all our notions of helping young people to be happy in their own skin"

It's not. We should absolutely do that.

And for the very small minority of young people who may be happy in their own skin by identifying and presenting as a gender other than their natal sex, that should not be denied them.

"why it's so very, very important we throw away all our notions of not making children into lifelong patients"

That's not a particularly well established notion, though is it. It's somewhat binary - people either benefit from medical treatments or they don't. We don't decide it would be preferable for someone to continue suffering in order to avoid them being 'a lifelong patient'. Of course where there are alternatives to medical treatments they should be explored - which is probably why only a very small minority of gender dysphoric young people end up on puberty blockers.

"of why we should ignore whistleblowers"

We shouldn't ignore them. But we should ask where they fit in in the wider consensus of expertise. We should not disregard the majority consensus just because of whistleblowers.

"of why we should deny the pain of detransitioners"

No one has done that. What I have done is shown that (a) detransitioners are smaller in numbers than people here claim or imply and (b) most of them detransition due to social pressure rather than their transition being wrong.

I've never denied that the very small minority who detransition because they made the wrong choice experience pain.

"why you have invested and continue to invest so much time and energy into breaking down ideas of the age of consent"

This is just another lie. I haven't even mentioned the age of consent, which relates to the age at which someone can consent to sex.

If you mean the age of medical competence, again I don't want to break down our ideas of the age of medical competence - I support the Gillick principles which have been established nearly forty years. It's actually posters like yourself who want to break down the long standing legal provisions on the age of medical competence.

You said 5000 were transitioning.

When I then said you made up the fact that 5000 were medically transitioning (since this is what this discussion is about) you said 'I didn't make it up'.

In other words you stood by the view that 5000 were medically transitioning.

Only later did you change your story to it being 5000 being referred - which does not mean 5000 medically transitioning, or even transitioning generally.

That’s the one! But I don’t think that’s what TeaKlaxon meant. I persisted with a paragraph search looking for a UK Paper and got to this page from Stonewall:

https://www.stonewall.org.uk/about-us/news/dispelling-myths-around-detransition

It contains the same figures quoted in TeaKlaxon’s paragraph. It is referencing this article as its source:

https://epath.eu/wp-content/uploads/2019/04/Boof-of-abstracts-EPATH2019.pdf

As you can see it’s a list of abstracts from EPATH. Expecting unbiased research from there is like looking in the Bible for evidence of evolution.

So I have no idea if the “one from the UK 2019” has been published in a peer-reviewed journal. In other words, the data quoted is trash.

Your original post did not say there were 5000 referrals.

Your original post said there were 5000 transitioning.

Stop lying.

Did you possibly manage to go as far as the second google result?

Or even the link contained within the article that was about the study?

Why don’t you just link the original article with a Pubmed reference?

This entire discussion is about the effects (and regret levels) associated with medical transitioning. None of this discussion has been about non-medical transitioning.

So when ClearMoth claimed there were 5000 children a year transitioning, it was very obviously a reference to medical transitioning.

But even if it weren't - it's still made up to claim there are 5000 children a year transitioning. That is still a lie.

There is no justification for putting children with mental health issues on a pathway which may lead to unnecessary surgery. None. We don't do it with other mental health issues so we shouldn't do it for this.

Exactly this. It always amazes me to read the comments from people defending this (i would also include young adults and vulnerable people in the above exclusion).

There is no evidence to support this approach in the long term and most of the patients with gender dysphoria who are given the option of medical transition are being sold a lie. It sets up a lifetime of increased anxiety at being ‘outed’ and declining health - many developing serious health conditions as a direct result of the medication or surgery.

It has killed some already and there is a young trans person who has been accepted for a ‘voluntary euthanasia’ plan in his own country (that is another horror unfolding) because of the irreversible harm he has done to his body through medical transition.

People blithely promoting medication and surgery for a mental health condition need to speak to some detransitioners. Scott Newgent on trevoices is powerful. This actual harm happening to actual people.

And to those that claim the numbers who regret transition are not so bad, I’d say that the most recent figures of approx 30% (despite the trans activists energetic attempts to suppress research and data on this) is pretty bad. I would imagine it will get worse due to the recent explosion in numbers.

Every single person who has had healthy body parts removed, made themselves sterile through medication, harmed their bone density and liver is a giant fail for the medical profession and the trans activists.

And who is this for? Why are we allowing doctors to give this unnecessary medication and surgery to people with the minimum of assessment or screening? Who benefits? The teeny tiny minority who do find medical transition worth it for the rest of their lives? There are a lot of people being sacrificed for that minority.

Right, so I’ve found the incredibly strong evidence that TeaKlaxon quoted for low rates of detransition. 🙄

It’s an abstract that was presented at the EPATH meeting in 2019. The lead author is Skye Davies. I cannot find this abstract as a publication in a peer reviewed journal anywhere. I can only provide a screenshot of the abstract. This is what they did.

They electronically scanned documents for words related to detransition or regret over the course of one year. They then pulled those records identified and reviewed them. They found 16 charts out of 3398 met their criteria. Based on this, they concluded detransition rates are low.

So for detransition to be recognised they relied on:
a) detransitioners coming to the clinic in that one year period
b) outwardly expressing concern in words related to their search that would have been found electronically.

And this was the adult clinic. And the one year period August 2016-2017 would have meant most of the children from the Tavistock won’t have reached that clinic yet.

No wonder it hasn’t been published in a peer reviewed journal. It’s the sort of garbage you expect medical students to do for little projects.

And this is what’s passed off by TeaKlaxon as evidence of low rates of detransition…

An absolute joke.

There is absolutely no evidence suggesting that 30% of people who transition regret their decision much less detransition.

And more amazing is the fact this piece of garbage is the first reference on the Wikipedia article about detransition. No wonder this lie persists.

Sorry yes, I should really be relying on reddit numbers and claiming that if you haven't picked up your prescription from a specific pharmacy, you must have detransitioned.

Much more reliable.

So you’re admitting your reference is a complete piece of garbage?

Did you even know what you were quoting, given you couldn’t even link it, or did you just rely on the Stonewall mantra to see you through?

Incidentally, your selective ignoring of all of the other studies showing similarly low levels of regret is noted.

No, I'm not at all.

All studies have limitations. That's why relying on single studies is generally not terribly robust.

There's at least five studies on here - one presented approvingly by someone on your side of the debate until she realised it didn't prove what she thought - all of which find that regret or detransition is between 0.3% and 4.4%.

By contrast, those claiming high levels of detransition don't have a single bit of evidence to support that claim.

Every single study showing single digit detransition rates suffers from short time frames and large loss to follow up in their studies. The original Dutch cohort for example, 20% of them aren’t available to study anymore.

I will repeat: if you don’t know what the detransition rate is, you can’t adequately consent. There is no informed consent.

The paper I linked earlier showed 30% of people stopped their hormone treatment. The authors were confident the patients stopped because their treatments were being financially subsidised and no other system existed to get it as cheap. There would be no motivation to order elsewhere because they’d pay much, much more. They have no way of knowing why people stopped their hormone treatments. But they did.

The fact that no one has any idea if, how, why people are stopping hormone treatments is the problem.

No one knows. So people cannot be properly consented at the start.

Your argument is essentially 'lots of trans people are just out there living their lives and no longer known to specialist clinics, so we should assume they regret their decisions'.

It's nonsense.