Red Flags and Radicals: A Detransitioner writes

[Bittermints]

Red Flags and Radicals: A Detransitioner’s Response to the Unhappiness of Andrea Long Chu

Interesting article from a detransitioner. I skimmed through that Andrea Long Chu article in the NYT the other day and was amazed. This is not normal or healthy behaviour, and it is a sign of how messed up we have become that anyone could think it is and that people feeling like that should be given surgery and hormones on demand.

That's another interesting parallel with pro-ana communities, the valorization of suffering and the way self-harming behaviors spread.

Precisely.

valorisation of suffering

That's a really good way of putting it, and an important point. It links to the hierarchy of identity politics, where the competition is to be the group that suffers most.

And weirdly, it links as well to our Christian cultural heritage: all of those saints and martyrs, almost in competition to see who could suffer the most gruesome form of torture and death and mutilation, and achieve the greatest veneration as a result. Hmm, not sure where I'm going with this, but it just popped into my head.

It was mostly young girls who developed stigmata too, wasn't it? Most societies have always been very keen on women's mental and emotional anguish being acted out upon our own bodies, and women and girls are trained to go along with that because our bodies are assumed to "speak" far more clearly than our voices ever could.

(In other words, there's a reason that there isn't much fuss being made about teenage girls binding and getting unneeded mastectomies, and it's a very old and very ugly one.)

It links to the hierarchy of identity politics, where the competition is to be the group that suffers most.

In other words, there's a reason that there isn't much fuss being made about teenage girls binding and getting unneeded mastectomies, and it's a very old and very ugly one.

If you put these things together, a picture appears, does it not?

I'm honestly so scared for young women right now. Look also at rapidly rising rates of suicide among young women in China - it's manifesting in different ways in different societies, but the underlying causes are the same.

It was mostly young girls who got stigmata

But that might be more of a social contagion issue, which we know does affect girls more than boys.

On the other hand, there was a bizarre religious movement in 19th century Russia where men chopped off their genitals to show their religious devotion (read about it in the excellent "The people's act of love" by James Meek).

From two posts above we see again that agreement on anything in this field may be ultimately impossible. Part of that problem may be that we all come from different " world views" and information sources, and don't often see the other views and experiences. Not until we are thoroughly imbued in The Obvious Right Opinion. Like Democrats and republicans in the USA, who get their info base from different sources, we are told.

Opinions on the Trans thing are based on theories and mind sets, aren't they? Not on very much objective evidence. Though the theories are couched in " The Truth Is..." terms.

Over the centuries very clever and thoughtful people have come to have views that now seem unbelievable. In my career I have worked with people who thought that EBD children were as they were " because of the moon", and that autism / homosexuality was caused by bad parenting. And on the latter thing these people could refer to respectable academic and medical " evidence".

I used to sit in meetings where physios almost came to blows over the merits of Bobath v Conductive Education methodologies. Both were right. Or wrong. Neither could prove that they were right. Actually either system, if done well, seemed to have good results.

Talking about the issues this thread is about, and the original article, is to me like "dancing about architecture"... we can refer all we want
to supposed evidence, and to such as psychiatric practice, and / or
feminist theory ,to underpin our views. But ...as I feel was seen in the original piece, we are often dealing with imprecise, unprovable assertions and understandings, and trying to understand something that is just not understood, using every bit of the " dancing about architecture" methods that are all we have.

Again, I thought that the original article was elegantly written but did not throw much light on anything. I don't understand the GD thing. I see that others don't , either. It seems to me ( only a subjective view) that it may have a variety of causes, and strengths, and may be an unchangeable brain condition acquired pre or post natally. It isn't about playing with "girls toys", or at least , it wasn't in my case and that of some people I know.

In this worldview it is more authentic for the transitioning person to prioritize short term, impulsive expressions of identity which expose them to danger than to use their executive functioning to plan and execute a transition in which they keep their job and home

So better to become martyrs than to prioritise their own self-interest. With "authenticity" as the substitute for "purifying the soul" or "attaining salvation", perhaps.

It's glamorous, isn't it. All those hermit saints with a "vocation" to lock themselves up and torture themselves, rather than trying to do good in society. And people would come and admire you for your saintliness, and after you die you could have a shrine containing one of your sacred body parts and people would come and pray to you....the ultimate ego trip.

So better to become martyrs than to prioritise their own self-interest. With "authenticity" as the substitute for "purifying the soul" or "attaining salvation", perhaps.

Also the TRA mantras create a false sense of urgency. You must do it now, or it will be too late.

And yes, among a subset of young people coming out as trans basically makes kids who had formerly been viewed by their peers as a bit nerdy and not very interesting sort of mini celebrities, and what lonely disaffected kid wouldn't find that appealing? It's not the one who're already the bright lights of their peer groups who're getting caught in the social contagion, for the most part. This movement is hoovering up vulnerable young people with alarming efficiency.

KayM2

I was surprised when I looked at the article again at how complex it was, and how many different things it covered. I think you have to read it very carefully - I've now actually copied it out into a Word document and used bold and highlighting, to tease out the different strands. Which means it could probably have been more clearly written, but I still think it says a lot of interesting things.

You say:

It seems to me ( only a subjective view) that it may have a variety of causes, and strengths, and may be an unchangeable brain condition acquired pre or post natally.

But that's pretty much what she says in the article:

We have every reason to think that, like most human experiences, the etiology of gender dysphoria is complex. Psychodynamic, social, and physiological components probably all play roles in varying capacities for each gender dysphoric person. Since we’re dealing with a large patient population it’s also rational to expect different solutions will work for different patients.

It's glamorous, isn't it. All those hermit saints with a "vocation" to lock themselves up and torture themselves, rather than trying to do good in society. And people would come and admire you for your saintliness, and after you die you could have a shrine containing one of your sacred body parts and people would come and pray to you....the ultimate ego trip.

Exactly this. I think Carey is such a challenging writer for all-comers because she sees this and isn't afraid to explore it. Like I say, I find it challenging myself on a personal level because the conclusions she draws are often quite individualist, where I come at things from a communitarian angle. But I like her so much because she knows she is going to incite conversations like the one we're having here - bad faith and desperate-to-distract contributions aside - and isn't afraid of us having them.

Also the TRA mantras create a false sense of urgency. You must do it now, or it will be too late.

Absolutely. As does the addiction to social media such as YouTube, where this stuff is prevalent. More that needs proper research. More proper research that isn't being done because it challenges the interests of middle-aged, middle class males.

But I like her so much because she knows she is going to incite conversations like the one we're having here - bad faith and desperate-to-distract contributions aside - and isn't afraid of us having them.

Exactly. Despite well organized attempts to push changes through in a no debate sort of way society isn't really having it - at best people have been cowed into silence, which is not the same thing as acceptance and is a very long way from belief. Carey understands that if you want people to believe something you have to explain why. And even if you do they still may end up not believing, and that's a normal feature of how societies work.

Carey understands that if you want people to believe something you have to explain why. And even if you do they still may end up not believing, and that's a normal feature of how societies work.

Imagine the strength of character it takes to put this stuff out there rather than go for the cheap option of my experience uber alles that all the others do. It really is something else.

Kay M2 You make a very important point here, and one that has been an interest/concern of mine for a long time:

Over the centuries very clever and thoughtful people have come to have views that now seem unbelievable. In my career I have worked with people who thought that EBD children were as they were " because of the moon", and that autism / homosexuality was caused by bad parenting. And on the latter thing these people could refer to respectable academic and medical " evidence".

But when you say "these people could refer to respectable academic and medical 'evidence'", it's important to remember that the standards of evidence supporting those ideas were incredibly low. We can and do do much better these days, and the vital thing is to keep plugging away at raising the standards, and criticising and exposing flawed research.

The whole underlying premise of psychological "research" used to be based on an almost religious worship of Freud: but that has been largely overturned now, and although he still has some adherents in terms of therapeutic methods, research psychologists generally regard his ideas as nonsense. I do believe that psychological research, properly conducted, can tell us things, and I believe/hope that eventually that research filters down to the practice of those in the caring professions, improving their practice. But it's undoubtedly a long, slow process. I forget who said that "science progresses one funeral at a time", but it is unfortunately true.

Sorry, I should have said above that the reason I was mentioning Freud was because those ideas about autism/homosexuality were based entirely on his (highly unscientific) work.

I'm OK with all that. Thanks for responding to my bibble .

I do believe that psychological research, properly conducted, can tell us things, and I believe/hope that eventually that research filters down to the practice of those in the caring professions, improving their practice. But it's undoubtedly a long, slow process. I forget who said that "science progresses one funeral at a time", but it is unfortunately true.

Max Planck? I think!

And we're back to the paucity of research and the ideological opposition to funding any, aren't we? Because better one funeral at a time than fear of results leading to more harm than necessary.

KayM2 I think your contributions are very valuable, not "bibble" at all!

I was just doing some more thinking about this, and what you said about "dancing about architecture", and about the whole research thing, and it occurred to me as well that, even if research were to reach a dead end as far as digging out useful information about GD, it would still be valuable to collect as many individual accounts as possible together, both from long-term transitioned people and from detransitioners, if only to provide individuals with a variety of insights and ways of reflecting on their own experience: yes, that matches what I feel, not that doesn't. Because I think that can be a really helpful approach for an individual to clarifying any psychological issue.

Langcleg

Yes, Max Planck, thanks!

Also the TRA mantras create a false sense of urgency. You must do it now, or it will be too late.

There's an article in the Mail today, about children buying blockers and hormones on line because of waiting times and age limits. This quote from the Tavistock mentions detransitioners.

‘It is incredibly dangerous to buy these online,’ said the spokesperson, who pointed out that many young people later change their mind about changing sex. ‘By getting drugs off the internet, adolescents may start on a path they don’t want to tread later on.’

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6448105/British-children-buy-sex-hormone-medication-foreign-sites-no-questions-asked.html

A sense of urgency, yes. Is it false? I have no settled view on this in individual cases. The problem wiy jout a solution is, I think, this;

On the one hand there is no doubt that in m to f early transition, hormones and surgery makes a massive difference to the life chances of the patient. Some early transsitioners are startlingly convincing in shape, voice, hair etc. So if transition is to happen the sooner the better..... oh but...

On the other hand neither the patient nor the professionals CAN tell if it is to be permanent, so early transition, hormones ( and surgery ) could prove to be a disaster.

Fortunately, I do not have to make such life changing " on balance" decisions. At least under the current , NHS, system, people have to go through psychiatric" gates".And the psychs at Charing Cross GC, where I went, are no pushover. Nor should they be.

Probably this is where blockers come in, on a " least worst option" to buy a little more time?

It's incredibly dangerous to buy any medications for which you do not have a prescription online, from sites with questionable supply chains, and those actively encouraging people to do so will hopefully one day be condemned for the risks they're attempting to expose others to.

There's an article in the Mail today, about children buying blockers and hormones on line because of waiting times and age limits.

There's a massive problem with counterfeit medications in general which is compounded many times when people are buying drugs from non-authorised suppliers.

WHO estimates that 50% of the drugs for sale on the internet are fake and even though the online dispensaries might look legitimate, a survey of 10 000 of them done by America's National Association of Boards of Pharmacy (NABP) found that 9938 did not comply with NABP patient safety and pharmacy practice standards or US state and federal laws. Most said they were based in Canada but were really a front for illegal offshore operations.

afludiary.blogspot.com/2015/10/the-lancet-who-estimates-that-50-of.html

Fake medicines: fighting on all fronts: www.thelancet.com/journals/lanres/article/PIIS2213-2600(18)30152-8/fulltext

Counterfeit Medications and Their Negative Impacts on Health Care: www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3996380/

Poor-quality antimalarial drugs in southeast Asia and sub-Saharan Africa: www.thelancet.com/journals/lancetid/article/PIIS1473-3099(12)70064-6/fulltext