I’ve been in discussion and I’m allowed repost with an adjustment. Thanks MNHQ 
. Thanks also to a lurker who I won’t name who kindly copied and pasted it and PM’d me. I’ll copy and paste any post on this subject in the future.
Things that are factual. We should be able to state things that are factual. Such as:
• The types of surgeries undertaken under the terminology of “sex reassignment surgery”, “gender affirming surgery” or various other terms are major surgeries. They include double mastectomy, orchidectomy, penectomy and formation of a sinus (a blind ended pouch).
• the scope of these surgeries is changing, from being done on adults who have experienced adult sexual function, to being done on people who are barely adults whose bodies have been arrested in a pre-pubertal state by hormone therapy and hence have never experienced sexual function
• subsequently, the surgeries are being done on pre-pubertal genital tissue
• these surgeries are experimental, and as such, technically challenging and have a high complication rate
• these surgeries will need lifelong attendance of medical and surgical clinics to be managed and kept “healthy”
• these surgeries are being performed on healthy tissues and healthy bodies [edit: subsequently I agree this should be amended to say bodies that have the potential still to be healthy]
• they are irreversible; once you remove a penis and testes, they can’t be put back
• there is nothing functional to be gained from a male having a hole created in the perineum; it can’t create pleasure, it can only be there as a receptacle for another male
• equally, there is nothing to be gained from an artificially created “phallus”; it will not experience pleasure in the way a penis does
• as a result of these irreversible surgeries being undertaken on pre-pubertal tissue the patient is 100% guaranteed to experience no sexual function and infertility, with a high possibility of complications such as pain and infection
• the single most-often quoted reason for these surgeries being undertaken is because of the benefits to mental health despite there being no clear evidence of such and publications that state opposing outcomes
• the studies on long term and short term outcomes of surgeries do not take into account the relatively new phenomenon of operating on pre-pubertal genitals; most studies have looked at data over years to decades, performed on adults who went through puberty
As a result of these facts, I’d be interested to hear arguments as to why this fashionable pathway of puberty blockers, cross sex hormones and then surgery is a good idea and I would like to hear from medical practitioners who advocate for it to understand how they justify it.
As an addit to the original post, I will also point out that puberty blockers will be discussed in a case in the High Court this week (see other threads) and I imagine many of these issues will be discussed.