Frack's reference post

[FrackOff]

Hi All
I have been asked in various threads for references. I am starting a new thread as I've lost track of all the conversations. I wasn't going to bother as people usually don't want to read them but since one or two have said they really do want to read them with an open mind, here are a few.

Reidar Schei Jessen & Katrina Roen (2019) Balancing in the margins
of gender: exploring psychologists’ meaning-making in their work with gender non- conforming youth seeking puberty suppression, Psychology & Sexuality, 10:2, 119-131, DOI: 10.1080/19419899.2019.1568290

ABSTRACT
The past 15 years have seen the growth of puberty suppression as the prevailing approach to supporting gender non-conforming children and youth. Puberty suppression is considered to provide time for weighing up the pros and cons of medical transition. Research based on binary under- standings of gender has demonstrated that a carefully selected group of gender non-conforming youth benefit from physical treatment and gender transition, but the research that details how psychologists can best support young people during this time is limited. This is the gap addressed by the current research. The purpose of the present study is to explore the meaning-making framework within which some clinical psychologists and gender non-conforming youth approach discussions of puberty suppression. Five semi-structured interviews were conducted with clinical psychologists working with gender non-conforming youth. The data were analysed using thematic analysis. The results indicate that there is pressure on gender non- conforming youth, often coming from families, friends and mass media, to buy into heteronormative and binary discourses regarding gender and what constitutes a good life. The results also indicate that the participants deploy affirmative and exploratory therapeutic strategies in their work, in order to enable gender non-conforming youth to make informed decisions regarding puberty suppression. Participants emphasized the importance of therapeutic approaches that explore non-binary gender discourses, alongside the use of puberty suppression and other medical interventions that enable clients to fit more with gender norms. The therapeutic balance between affirmation and exploration may shed light on how both research within the binary tradition and critics of binary assumptions are in danger of oversimplifying the process of gender identity development. This research highlights the importance of understanding the complex negotiation of gender discourses that are in tension with one another.

But not so interested that you want to have frank and open discussions on it?

You mean like due to the transphobia within the transgender industry which pushes for ‘affirmation only’ even though it is harmful to the individuals ‘affirmed’?

I am here aren't I? This forum isn't exactly conducive to having discussions with more than one set of opinions though. You have to sift through the personal attacks in order to get to the substantive issues and it's hard emotional work to sustain a rational discussion. It's not how I have discussions with GC people in the real world which tend to be more constructive and nuanced.

So I am also interested in the longterm impacts on people's physical and mental wellbeing of other systemic and societal prejudice, like transphobia, homophobia, classism, sexism, Islamophobia etc

You're missing misogyny from that list. It's not the same as sexism.

And that isn't a personal attack?

Everything that has been written about Jazz Jennings is factually accurate. You’re inferring it as “visceral” and that’s a shame. But in no way will I ever tiptoe around what has happened to Jazz using cutesy flowery language. By doing that it neatly covers up the truth:

Has never and will never had an orgasm = will be unfortunate to never experience the joys of intimacy.

Had a cavity created in the perineum using prepubertal tissue and lining of the bowel and had a number of complications from the surgeries = had a pretty little front hole fashioned by a surgeon.

Sorry, won’t do it.

I am going to have to leave the thread then.

It reminds me of the way Susie Green doesn’t like using the word “castration” when people talk about her talking her child to Thailand where the child’s testicles were removed. Much nicer to say “gender-affirming surgery”. Much prettier and cute isn’t it.

This forum isn't exactly conducive to having discussions with more than one set of opinions though. You have to sift through the personal attacks in order to get to the substantive issues and it's hard emotional work to sustain a rational discussion.
Frack people have taken the time to read through your references and have tried to have a discussion about it, a lot of which you won't discuss. Thankfully because of the work posters have put into reading and discussing your references a lot of people will now understand a lot more,me included.
You say people are using language that you find uncomfortable well changing language is one of the reasons we are here in the first place.

frack

If you don't have a visceral reaction to Jazz Jennings, you're not paying attention.

Jazz Jennings is the only possible outcome of continual affirmation. If Jazz Jennings had not had this surgery, Jazz Jennings would have the face and of a body of a woman, and the genitals of a prepubescent boy.

Apart from these two outcomes, there is no other outcome on a path that starts with puberty blockers. The GIDS clinic here has said that puberty blockers cements the forward trajectory. It's not a pause button.

You advocating for this, publicly, on this form, will of course produce a reaction. The fact you take that as a personal attack is either irrational, if you don't understand why, or manipulative, if you do.

Please don't engage in a discussion over ROGD, the use of puberty blockers and what we are subjecting children to, if you have no intention of dealing with the outcome. What a nonsense.

I am going to have to leave the thread then.

Because you feel that what was done to Jazz was so terrible that you can only bear to discuss it in euphemisms? We all feel it was terrible, but we can only bring an end to it - make sure no other child goes through that - if we talk about it in plain language.

I can't begin to describe how irresponsible I think this thread is, Frack. You start a thread with all manner of academic justifications, but appear crushed by the reality!

Stop advocating for something that you personally can't even bear to deal with.

someone close to me died recently

we had a departmental meeting at work with a presentation that related to bereavement. I excused myself to go to the toilet so I didn't lose my shit in front of all my colleagues

what I didn't do was initiate a conversation about bereavement, then tell anyone who said anything I didn't like that it was triggering, then make a song and dance about leaving the conversation

You advocating for this, publicly, on this form, will of course produce a reaction. The fact you take that as a personal attack is either irrational, if you don't understand why, or manipulative, if you do.

This.

If a child being rendered anorgasmic for its entire adult life below the age of consent triggers a trauma response in you, Frack, I would suggest not starting a thread that advocates for it.

Frack can you really not understand how deeply unethical it is to obscure the reality of medical procedures behind twee language?

It isn't 'bottom surgery'. It is genital mutilation.
Jazz does not have a 'pretty vagina'. Jazz has a cosmetic facsimile of female genitalia constructed out of Jazz's artficially pre-pubescent penis and bowel tissue which is nothing whatsoever like a vagina in form or function.

It is unethical to promote these procedures when you are not willing to call them what they are and when you are not willing to be honest about the possible outcomes.

Jazz should never have been told Jazz could have a vagina because Jazz can't. Jazz is male. Jazz will never have female genitals. Jazz could not consent to the procedures Jazz has been subject to because no one told Jazz the truth. There was no informed consent.

Was this thread starter as a game Frac, to try and reach bigots a lesson, prove they are all uneducated scum and know nothing?
Then I think the reality of what you are supporting set in and you realised it's abosulty fucking horrific and can't bring yourself to discuss it.

But also can't bring yourself to admit it, so want people to shut up.

I’m never not going to be shocked that these unproven life-changing permanent things are being done to kids as if they were actual proven medical ‘treatment’ that will definitely make their emotional distress feel better. They’re not even being done properly as research. Its awful.
Not that I

Me neither chatty.

Girls as young as 13 having double mastectomies

13 years old

Feminists point out the game is fixed.

Fauxmenists insist the only thing that needs to change is that we learn to play nicely and follow the rules.

Notbad

So true. Like top surgery and bottom surgery.

The correct terminology makes advocates uncomfortable.
Shame.

You have to sift through the personal attacks in order to get to the substantive issues and it's hard emotional work to sustain a rational discussion.

We've been trying to discuss the papers you posted and you're the one who is refusing to engage. If you've seen personal attacks you should report them, but I don't think saying 'I wonder why frack won't discuss this' counts as a personal attack.

The only thing that's really been 'proved' by the papers you linked to is that transitioning is often used to 'cure' homosexuality and that the treatments used have not been properly tested and have many harmful and unwanted effects.

Captain

Yes, Frack had to point out that Frack has working class friends. And that Frack is an academic.

My credentials are that I am a female and a concerned parent who works with children.

Frack has been quick to point out their status, yet fails to answer if they are a parent. I want to know what skin you have in this game, Frack. Why you are so insistent on promoting a form of Eugenics on children?

Grooming and abuse needs to be discussed, if you feel yucky or triggered then why not use that big middle class brain of yours to analyse why? Though we all know the true answer.

But even if I was none of the above, I wouldn't need a doctorate to tell me that experimenting on children is wrong.

In which universe would such mutilation/amputation ever be right?

*Not that I understand the science, so this thread is very helpful

Commentary on your behaviour is not a personal attack Frack. Considering you felt able to start a thread accusing those of us who object to trans ideology of perpetuating white colonialism you’re already on shaky ground anyway.

The fact you have to leave a thread where medical procedures you support are laid out in accurate medical detail is frankly pathetic. If you’re unable to think clearly about these procedures how can you support them?

Although you did say it was the reference to ability to orgasm that triggered you first, so it sounds like you’re having trauma responses all over the place.

I am going to have to leave the thread then.

But we're doing exactly what you asked people to do, FrackOff - discussing the material provided in your OP. And yet you're going to have to stomp off.

Nothing to do with having your arse handed to you then?