Are kids on blockers a-sexual as adults?

[naivetyisthenewblack]

Can anyone help me work this one through?

I've been realising with horror that if a kids takes blockers before puberty, then goes on to hormones and surgery, then they'll not only be sterile but likely end up incapable of sexual function. They'll be asexual as an adult.

Jazz Jennings, for example, has been open about not having ever had an orgasm at 18 and that their penis never matured into an adults penis, so Jazz's neo-vagina was created out of their child's penis and part of the colon IIRC.

Am I right in thinking all boys who take blockers before puberty kicks in will be incapable of sexual desire or adult sexual function when they grow up if they never have a male puberty?

Then what about girls who take blockers before puberty? I understand testosterone can enlarge the clitoris but also causes the vagina to atrophy. Can girls who go onto blockers before puberty then onto T expect any kind of functional sex life as an adult?

I haven't seen this discussed much, but I think it's important as I suspect many parents / teachers / professionals advocating acceptance of transing children aren't aware of this.

Also, do blockers stop children developing into adults with sexual desire?

Are we creating a generation of asexual adults who have no comprehension of what they're missing?

Also someone else pointed out on another thread - Jazz's neo-vagina is there to provide a sexual service for men, but not for Jazz, other than for validation.

What kind of person wants to have sex with someone who can't ever gain sexual pleasure from it? What kind of partner can they expect to have?

Wasn't there another thread on this recently, where someone linked to specialists discussing the issue as one that they weren't sure about and hadn't really paid any attention to? Totally bizarre...

What kind of person wants to have sex with someone who can't ever gain sexual pleasure from it?

Isn’t that the point of FGM? To make sure sexual pleasure is for the man, not the woman, who might otherwise be lead into sinfulness?

Yes I remember that. There were screen shots An expert of some sort (I forget which) saying the parents of a trans kids had asked about sexual function and how she thought that was an intelligent and sophisticated question or some such rubbish.

A pretty basic question if you ask me.

And none of her expert mates knew even though they were working with trans kids IIRC.

Quite often OP asking these questions will get an aggressive admonition in response that you are obsessing over trans people's genitals and not thinking about them as people. It's usually a very effective tactic for closing down discussion.

The widespread use of such tactics have pretty much stopped discussing about these important issues. It's amazing isn't it?

This thread will be deleted any second now since we're not supposed to talk about the massively life altering, appalling realities of this, or its impact on safeguarding.

And yes, JJ has been told they will be in effect asexual. They talk in terms of romantic attachments and pansexuality. It is unclear in the programme whether the medics or JJ's parents were aware of this being the outcome when the decisions were made to put them on medication. I have seen a happy tweet to someone about 'and if the meds make you asexual it's just another identity!'

Words fail. This is a massive, massive safeguarding nightmare, it's a terrible thing to do and historically such procedures have been regarded as immoral and without place in a civilised society since the late 1860s when they stopped the creation of (often consenting and actively requesting) castrato boys to preserve their voice career for Italian opera.

I am in no way an expert but from my understanding, adult sexual function is a culmination of hormones coupled with brain development. Puberty being the process that allows for the maturation of sexual function is therefore integral. I suspect that, because the process starts at different ages and progresses at different rates, that the extent that puberty delay and/or an induction of a cross sexed puberty effects each child will be different, so some children like JJ will be asexual but some may retain desire if puberty was interrupted after that process had already happened for them.

Of course surgery on top of hormones adds a whole other layer because nerves are being cut/lost (which must also reduce sensation). If I remember correctly I think JJ opted for the surgery where they use a sub-layer of skin from the abdomen rather than th colon surgery - just for accuracy’s sake.

As for girls on T, that’s an interesting question and I don’t really know the answer. I have heard transmen describe an increase in desire but how it would impact the development of sexual function in pubertal girls, I don’t know.

I’ve posted about this before but I was on one of these drugs for two years in my mid 20s, so a decade ago. I’ve lost all sex drive, to the point that the thought of being touched sexually makes me feel ill, and my health is dire (seems my hormones are a mess but doctors aren’t interested in helping). I can’t imagine what happens if you’re on them during adolescence.

Maybe we should encourage teenagers to masturbate. Then say to them "transition means you will never have that feeling again .... ever"

I wonder how many of them would want to lose the ability to orgasm once they understood what it meant they were giving up?

The short answer is we don’t really know because nobody is considering it or monitoring it.

It’s hugely disturbing - the idea of successfully treating an adult with dysmorphia is that their life improves Post transition. But to ‘treat’ a child means that their reproductive ability and future sexual function is destroyed.

We then have to ask - who is this actually bring done for? For a child who will grow into a person who has no reproductive ability, no ability to experience sexual pleasure and a prebuscent physiology? And joint damage, cognitive damage etc?

Who is this benefitting? Someone weeks back said something about this creating a doll class and a controller class and I think that was perceptive.

Remember that the push in adults is for demedicalisation. No treatment and of course full sexual function.

Funny how the ‘harmless pause button’ crowd disappear when faced with Tammy’s personal experience

Quite often OP asking these questions will get an aggressive admonition in response that you are obsessing over trans people's genitals and not thinking about them as people

Which is clearly the wrong way round - we're thinking of them as people, and not obsessing over their genitals.

Maybe we should encourage teenagers to masturbate

My experience as a teenager is that encouragement isn't needed.

If there's one thing we learn from this issue Micke it's that most gender identity ideology "logic" is the wrong way round.

For the ideologues, the key is to prevent people from thinking about this or from talking about it when they've seen it.

I've been realising with horror that if a kids takes blockers before puberty, then goes on to hormones and surgery, then they'll not only be sterile but likely end up incapable of sexual function. They'll be asexual as an adult.

It's worse even than that though really. Yes, they will end up asexual but who are 'they?' Many of them are autistic or have survived complex sexual assault. They are children at the more vulnerable end of the spectrum. Most would grow up to be comfortable in their own skin if they had adequate mental health support. We're mutilating completely physically healthy people!

And many will realise sometimes up to 2 decades later that they desperately want their own biological children and can't have them not to mention the fact many will get cancer or complications from having, say, a hysterectomy.

Loss of sexual function is a dreadful thing though and needs shouting about for its own sake. Wouldn't you think the adult trans community would want to campaign hard for much better mental health support so as few people as possible end up having damaging surgery? It says quite a lot that they aren't.

No, nothing to see here

twitter.com/mimmymum/status/1058310179111034880

BTW I think the thread may be allowed to stay up if we don't mention a certain organisation, a certain mother/CEO or her child, or speculate about the ethics/sanity/legality of her parenting choices. I could be wrong though. Let's see.

We are not allowed to speculate about the genitals of identifiable individuals, especially children.

If posters avoid such speculation, the thread may remain, though individual posts may be deleted.

Wouldn't you think the adult trans community would want to campaign hard for much better mental health support so as few people as possible end up having damaging surgery? It says quite a lot that they aren't.

The trans community, or, more likely, the TRA 'community', does not care because it is made up of inherently selfish narcissists.

It’s hugely disturbing - the idea of successfully treating an adult with dysmorphia is that their life improves Post transition. But to ‘treat’ a child means that their reproductive ability and future sexual function is destroyed.

To clarify, I mean that an adult with diagnosed dysphoria may find their life and mental health improves if they transition. That’s very different from treating a child though. A child has not had the pubertal changes which physically and mentally build the adult. Puberty almost doubles skeletal mass for example, and the bone laid down then is a key determiner of bone density in later life. Mental changes, brain maturation etc occur as well as the obvious physical maturation. To stop a child going through this denies them the chance to even experience what it is to be and adult Male or Female.

We have no idea what the physical or mental consequences will be. The drugs used as blockers have multiple irreversible and lifelong side effects. They are also contraindicated for use in anyone with mental health issues and unlicensed for use in gender dysphoria.

There is no justification ethically or medically to give a child blockers for gender questioning. 80% of children questioning gender eventually end up being ok with it. Not only are these kids physically healthy they’re in the main not even going to have dysphoria after puberty. It’s horrific to realise that children are being pushed down a path which really has no off ramp. Once you’re on blockers the social pressure to continue is immense.

My heart breaks for these kids. The vast majority are children with various issues who need support and help to become comfortable in their skin.

This is going to be the scandal of our era.

I think it’s unfair to talk about particular named children and young people and better to talk about the issue more generally.

I've just looked at that Mimmymum thread.

The key thing seems to be this:
'the possible risks of treatment are ALWAYS balanced against the benefits'.

I don't have the medical knowledge to assess the level of risk, or the psychiatric knowledge to assess the level of benefit, so I would (if I were a parent in that unenviable position) like to see some massive, statistically significant long-term studies that told me whether the likely outcome ten/twenty years down the line would be better for my child with, or without, the use of blockers.

(I did snort wryly at her comparison with off-label use of the contraceptive pill for acne treatment. DD had a pretty severe depressive reaction to the Pill which took a while to diagnose.)

'the possible risks of treatment are ALWAYS balanced against the benefits'.

This is why the inflated suicide stats are pushed so much. The level of harm and risk is so high that the only way it’s outweighed is if it’s avoiding a high chance of death.

Any ethics committee that doesn’t ask for varified data on those risks and benefits is not doing its job correctly.

What does that mimmymummy tweet say ? She has blocked me, so I can’t see it. I’ve never interacted with her, so I assume she uses a block list based on people who follow GC feminists.

But presumably someone, somewhere, first signed off on the use of puberty blockers for these purposes, and must have felt that the results were fairly benign.

Surely?

(I'm trying quite hard not to have a knee-jerk reaction to this.)