Horrifying TED talk on trans children by paediatric endocrinologist.

[TurboTeddy]

This was posted on Lily Maynard's twitter.

The callous way in which the doctor discusses the "elimination" of reproductive capability and uses that as an excuse to perform surgery at an early age is horrifying. She makes no mention of loss of sexual function or rather failure to develop sexual function.

Surgery on adolescents is discussed as a challenge to be met by pioneering surgeons. She almost seemed proud that she was great at her job neutering children she and was inviting the surgeons to step up and prove they were equal to her.

It's difficult to even find words to describe how wrong this is and so blatant, it almost feels boastful. I've worked with many Drs who would say that just because you can it doesn't mean you should. Is medical ethics out of fashion?

twitter.com/LilyLilyMaynard/status/1159619154984484864?s=20

30% are not able to reach orgasm post-surgery

I know you qualified this CharlieParley but just to add that would mean that 70% of men with butchered genitals will be able to reach orgasm. I don't believe it.

a doctor with a god complex is a good summary. The surgeons involved in this really do bring to mind Mengele.

Well, that video will certainly be of value to Avery's lawyers in the future. Creepy AF though.

How on earth does she differentiate between the parent's wants and the child's needs? This makes a mockery of the oath "First do no harm".

Dare I ask what the other surgical methods are?

Bowel and arm skin are 2 I can think of

The point about not being able to tell the difference between males and females in a 6 week embryo is nuts (no pun intended..). All you see of a 6 week embryo on ultrasound is a heartbeat - you can't see limbs, let alone genitalia. But the embryo IS male or female from the moment of conception, as she must know perfectly well.

This is horrific and only one of several bizzare TED talks that I have seen. Then I realised that I know nothing about TED itself.

It was apparently taken over by a British/American called Chris Anderson in the early 2000s after he made a lot of money in publishing. It is run from his non-profit organisation called the Sapling Foundation whose stated aim is to

foster the spread of great ideas. It aims to provide a platform for the world's smartest thinkers, greatest visionaries and most-inspiring teachers, so that millions of people can gain a better understanding of the biggest issues faced by the world, and a desire to help create a better future.

They license independent organisations to run TEDx talks and the competition is fierce to be accepted. In this article, one woman, who was turned down to give a talk, describes the process.

www.forbes.com/sites/morraaaronsmele/2018/01/12/the-myth-of-the-ted-talk/

It is clear that trans must be one of the "great ideas" that they wish to spread because just a cursory glance at the youtube sidebar shows several pro-trans speakers.

Interestingly, there is about a one in 18,000 chance of making it from TEDx to TED.com and so it is prestigious indeed to be a bonafide TED speaker. And who is on the home page of today's TED.com as a fully fedged TED speaker? - Nicola Sturgeon who is apparently

"an important progressive and feminist voice in the governance of the United Kingdom"

So progressive in fact that we all know that she is only biding her time before she can give full rein to doctors like the one giving this talk.

And why is Nicola doing this? because she obviously sees it as part of somehting she began in 2018 as

Scotland, Iceland and New Zealand established the network of Wellbeing Economy Governments to challenge the acceptance of GDP as the ultimate measure of a country's success. In this visionary talk, First Minister of Scotland Nicola Sturgeon explains the far-reaching implications of a "well-being economy" which places factors like equal pay, childcare, mental health and access to green space at its heart and shows how this new focus could help build resolve to confront global challenges.

And where are TED based? In Vancouver, Canada of course.

So trans ideology is obviously part of the ambitious Ms Sturgeons strategy to be a global mover and shaker to take Scotland from being the most drug-addicted nation on earth to a veritable northern paradise.

I find TED controlling and cult-like. If you want to spread great ideas, you don't rigidly control which ideas can be discussed - because that assumes that the TED organisers have some magical insight into which ideas are good or bad.

Also, everyone I know personally who has ever done a TED talk is a twat

How on earth does she differentiate between the parent's wants and the child's needs? This makes a mockery of the oath "First do no harm"
How, as a dr , when she has seen and/or heard if children going through all.sorts of horrific things. The.medical.profession must have seen.hundreds of cases of pregnant 12 year olds or rape victims ,.abused children etc and then have the audacity to stand in front of hundreds of people and tall about a kid who cant decide between shorts or dress and what shoes to wear.

2 thirds of girls are far more concerned with whether or not they will get harassed that day than unicorn back packs 🙄

This is an article about John Money's experiment on David Reimer, the SRS case after botched circumcision. John Money's wiki page is also worth a visit for info on his veiws about adult/child relationships. The content of then article isn't graphic but its not comfortable reading.

embryo.asu.edu/pages/david-reimer-and-john-money-gender-reassignment-controversy-johnjoan-case

What we learn in this case is that two doctors used experimental techniques to cause irreparable harm to a child.

that assumes that the TED organisers have some magical insight into which ideas are good or bad.

They don't need magical insight - they just need global reach and influence.

This is just horrifying...

This is eugenics. It is a crime against humanity. Its supporters nothing but modern day Mengeles.

They call m e transphobe? Whatever. That word just means 'not a eugenicist'.

My tablet powered down before I could finish my last post but just wanted to mention John Money was a psychologist and "sexologist" not a surgeon.

This is a medical condition invented by the medics and big pharma.

Iatrogenesis - Medical conditions caused by doctors.

Doctors can say no.
Doctors should say no.

This is truly horrifying. I hope that one day this video will be used in evidence in court against this wicked doctor.

The case study of Avery she provides is so very explicit, unusual and therefore outing that to my mind it breaches medical confidentiality.

I grew up in a medical household so was very aware of confidentiality from childhood and this really shouts out to me. It might have been ok in a closed meeting but in a TED talk? No. Just no.

Prawnofthepatriarchy
Do you think it's real or just an invented story to make her case? The opening section about Avery's "girly" morning routine came across as a manipulative work of fiction.

If the case is real (shudder), then I would not be surprised to discover there was a long line of doctors who were consulted, who were probably initially sensible, kind, advised the parents idea was a bit silly, followed by at least one doctor who raised child protection concerns and was a bit more forthright, before finally the parents found someone who told them what they wanted to hear. I’ve seen it so many times and experienced it personally. I’ve had parents cancel and the reason given being “we’ve seen Dr [insert name of quack] who finally diagnosed [insert quack condition like pyroluria etc] that Dr NotBad refused to test for [because it’s bullshit]”. Mostly I just roll my eyes, but in Avery’s case I can imagine there are good doctors out there who watch that video and are horrified about it because they probably met the child and parents and tried their best.

I’ve seen it so many times and experienced it personally. I’ve had parents cancel and the reason given being “we’ve seen Dr [insert name of quack] who finally diagnosed [insert quack condition like pyroluria etc] that Dr NotBad refused to test for [because it’s bullshit]”. Mostly I just roll my eyes, but in Avery’s case I can imagine there are good doctors out there who watch that video and are horrified about it because they probably met the child and parents and tried their best

Agree. I have often seen this with children, and even more often with adults.

I think Avery is likely a composite but, if she is real, her parents have probably given permission to use her case - after all, they've already made her infertile, so what's one more boundary violation?

Given the complete absence of medical ethics in her TED talk I wouldn't be remotely surprised if Avery is a real patient. If you're going to practice medicine like that then what's a bit of confidentiality breaching between friends?

Thanks for the link, TurboTeddy. I feel really bad for Jazz. Who knows what the long term implications are for them not having gone through puberty.
I found the article annoying in mentioning that gender affirmation forgery gives the functionality of the desired genitalia. It clearly doesn't.

Sewing part of your colon, intestine or stomach lining (?) onto the base of your penis and shoving that up inside a surgically made wound, instead of just "inverting" the whole penis with the tip cut off.

Bowel and arm skin are 2 I can think of

Good thing I've not eaten yet....

She might as well have just got up there and said "Hello, I advocate poisoning and mutilating children! Go me, I'm so PROGRESSIVE."
Sorry if I'm being a bit crude, but I could feel my blood pressure rising more and more as she spoke.
A newborn baby isn't sodding transgender. A preschooler isn't transgender. A twelve year old who has been repeatedly told by their parents that they're the opposite sex isn't transgender, they're brainwashed.

I don't see how any "vagina" created from intestines can have any sensation at all, let alone any sense of pleasure.
This is barbaric.

My impression was that Avery is a composite chart, no doubt based in reality. In particular the Avery whose reproductive potential has been eliminated is, I think, a vision of what this awful doctor’s “preferred” treatment of such a young person would be. But I can’t bring myself to watch it again to confirm that impression.

Anyone complicit in this will surely face a tsunami of law suits in the next 10-20 years, and the world will say “how was this allowed to happen?”. I for one am glad I’m on the side trying to stop it.

Argh, composite character!

I don't see how any "vagina" created from intestines can have any sensation at all, let alone any sense of pleasure

It won't have. The gut doesn't have the right sort of nerve receptors. Penetration of the 'vagina' will probably stimulate the prostate gland to some extent but I doubt it would be enough to orgasm. If post-surgery TW can orgasm, it's probably through direct prostate massage via the rectum.

In an adult who has experience sexual pleasure, and knowingly chooses to forego it, having been properly counselled about post-op sexual function, that is arguably their choice. To do this to a child or to a young adult who has been on PBs/cross-sex hormones, so has never experienced normal sexual function, is absolutely appalling.