Canada - Judge delays double mastectomy

[Dimpsey]

Saw this on twitter and thought I would share: vancouversun.com/news/b-c-supreme-court-judge-orders-surgeon-to-deny-trans-teens-mastectomy-wish?utm_term=Autofeed&utm_medium=Social&utm_source=Twitter#Echobox=1604974077

Mother of the child asking the surgeons to provide evidence of the protocol they have followed to demonstrate that the operation is in the child's best interests.

@Winesalot

This comment makes perfect sense when one starts with intolerance and works backwards.

Yes. An intolerance for women.

What have any of my comments so far got to do with inclusive language (vulva-havers, etc)?

The answer is nothing, the commonality is underlying intolerance of trans people (iow transphobia). Its is like some perverse form of word association bingo. You start with intolerance , and just let it land on anything you like - science, sports, bathrooms, misogyny - i used to do the same thing when i used to talk about motorcycles - pistons? Carbs! jet sizes? Cables! Lube? Brake pads! and this could go on all night. Pointless, indulgent and extremely satisfying. I see you!

Incidentally, the whole "period people" thing was an effort to be more inclusive to trans men and NB people, and nothing to do with us trans women (for once).

I see you! me? You see me?

I don't think that you do actually? You don't seem to have answered my questions.

Also, I'd like to point out that my question that involved dehumanised language was this one:

MadBadDaddy 'Fourthly: By 'infertile' I presume you mean 'unable to get pregnant (as adults)' - this is not always the case, but why is this an outrageuous thing to choose? The world is overcrowded, adoption is a thing, and your opinion is a bit reductive towards female bodies.'

me 'Or do you agree that women’s bodies should become incubators (that word gets used a lot) for surrogacy and all the risks of death, shorten life (stoke etc) and permanent infertility that is well documented in this provision for children for those who decide later that actually they DO want children?'

It was in response to your flippant remark actually. And yes, I have seen plenty of discussion around the solution to these early transitioners plight of infertility is for 'surrogacy'.

We could discuss this usage of women's bodies but it may be better on a different thread. Because, be in no doubt, using women's bodies for surrogacy is a very feminist issue.

Pointless, indulgent and extremely satisfying. I see you! what the actual fuck?

You start with intolerance , and just let it land on anything you like - science, sports, bathrooms, misogyny - i used to do the same thing when i used to talk about motorcycles - pistons? Carbs! jet sizes? Cables! Lube? Brake pads

This simply confirms the point women make repeatedly. The legal exemptions in the Equality Act for female only services and sports are viewed as intolerance rather than legal discrimination established for a valid and essential purpose.

This thread is a classic explanation of why the work women are doing is necessary.

And a motorcycle with a few parts missing is still a motorcycle.

Credit to PeachYoghurt.

@Winesalot

I see you! me? You see me?

I don't think that you do actually? You don't seem to have answered my questions.

Your questions are endless and boundless, your processing of what i say minimal. This is turning into transphobia bingo, and i'm not inclined to continue playing. I owe you no answers, your ignorance is your problem, not mine. I came here to defend children, much like you, albeit different children. I'm sorry that you can't see that.

Threatening trans children with infertility and "asexuality" (same patronising post that i was responding to) is shaming, and shameful, and reductive. Contraception, abortion, chemotherapy can also lead to infertility and other consequences, so why single out gender dysphoria for a guilt-trip?

We're talking about the actual harm caused to children by massively invasive surgery, you're talking about possible harm which might happen to children if they are not allowed to opt for massively invasive surgery before they are fully mature.

Same subject, completely opposite sides.

You’re equating women discussing the possible consequences of paediatric/young people’s transition, using our own experiences of growing up distressed in female bodies, our experiences in raising children or in being infertile to relate to and empathise with said young person, and comparing it with talking about motorcycles?

Ive misread that, surely.

Your questions are endless and boundless, your processing of what i say minimal. To be clear. I have asked for clarification several times because you keep telling us you have explained something, and you don't seem to have.

This is turning into transphobia bingo, and i'm not inclined to continue playing. Please tell me what I have said that is transphobic?

I owe you no answers, your ignorance is your problem, not mine Still not sure why you are singling me out and I keep asking for clarification for your points of view. Just like others have.

I came here to defend children, much like you, albeit different children.

How are they different children? Are you saying that the search for better informed and evidence based healthcare for all people and taking into consideration the many factors affecting females of all ages is defending different children to those you tell us you are defending?

Are you reacting to my view that perhaps are not taking on board that many of the women writing posts on this thread and reading this thread have actually got some experience to share here? I did not negate your experience that is also relevant, but you have constantly ignored ours. Is this what you are referring to?

Threatening trans children with infertility and "asexuality" (same patronising post that i was responding to) is shaming, and shameful, and reductive.

This is NOT a threat. This is the reality of these procedures and this medication. That is exactly the point we are trying to make here.

Contraception, abortion, chemotherapy can also lead to infertility and other consequences, so why single out gender dysphoria for a guilt-trip?

We are talking about children. Chemotherapy is a life saving intervention. Contraception and abortion are not relevant to this discussion although it has been brought into this thread previously.

Where is the proof that the treatment for GD for children needs to result in medicalisation that leads to the health issues mentions?
Where is the proof that the medicalised treatment needs to be done before that person is 18?

Contraception, abortion, chemotherapy can also lead to infertility

Evidence please MadBadDaddy?

In fact, Safe, legal, accessible abortion today does not have any effect on future fertility. Likewise with contraception.

Women have suffered unduly from stress and fear and anxiety and a lack of access to abortion and contraception for generations, a lack of access which in worst case situations can cause female death, sometimes directly due to myths and lies told about these medical treatments.
I’m sure you wouldn’t support furthering those misconceptions at all.

Yes, it seems that SOME chemo drugs, so not all, can have adverse effects on future fertility for men and women and induce early menopause in women. www.royalmarsden.nhs.uk/your-care/treatments/chemotherapy/chemotherapy-effects-and-side-effects/fertility-pregnancy

Contraception, abortion, chemotherapy can also lead to infertility and other consequences, so why single out gender dysphoria for a guilt-trip?

Contraception, abortion, chemotherapy: clear medical needs. All the therapy in the world won't stop you being pregnant or having cancer.

Gender dysphoria: a mental health issue like any other dysphoria. Therapy is likely to be beneficial. No need for it to affect future sexual function and fertility.

Being gender non conforming is of course perfectly normal and needs no intervention whatsoever.

MadBad
"You want to talk about cruel? How might an infertile person feel whenever trans children's (potential) infertility gets held aloft as the "worst" outcome of transition? It doesn't sound very 'feminism' to value women mostly as incubating bodies, IMHO."

Ffs. There is absolutely nothing wrong with being a woman. What differentiates us from men is the fact that we can carry and birth children (or will be/were able to or are unable to due to a medical condition).

That doesn't mean that it's all we can/could do or aspire to - we are human just like men are.... Something that misogynists tend to forget.

Honestly, the arrogance of thinking none of us who've had teenage female bodies and now have teenage DDs know anything about this at all.

I'm someone who thought she was a boy as a child. Bloody glad chopping my breasts off and becoming infertile wasn't an option then or I wouldn't have (teenage) DD.

your processing of what i say minimal I would have to say, that I find that your processing of what I and others say to be non existent and tone deaf.

And having had conversations with you in the past, I thought that this time you might actually answer some questions as we seemed to have at least concern for the health care of children and teens in common.

Seems that I was wrong. Again.

Threatening trans children with infertility and "asexuality" (same patronising post that i was responding to) is shaming, and shameful, and reductive. Contraception, abortion, chemotherapy can also lead to infertility and other consequences, so why single out gender dysphoria for a guilt-trip?

Threatening? Dear lord. Are you actually saying that children are threatened with infertility and loss of sexual function to make them change their minds??

For fuck's sake.

This is about adults treating children that will result in infertility and loss of sexual function.

And, again, the only justification you have given is that you aspire to be a fictional character in a film.

As for the rest of your post about contraception and abortion also leading to infertility? And cancer?

Awful, desperate nonsense.

The topic of the thread is very simple. A supreme court has delayed surgery for the child's parents see the protocol followed by the cosmetic surgeon as they want appropriate non surgical health care to be provided first.

Every insult and diversion possible is hauled out and chucked at people simply considering this judgement and the thread taken over by the person doing that who then shouts transphobic bingo at posters.

It's indicative of how difficult every aspect for parents with affected children becomes, and of the severe hostility experienced by people defending the Equality Act.

You want to talk about cruel? How might an infertile person feel whenever trans children's (potential) infertility gets held aloft as the "worst" outcome of transition? It doesn't sound very 'feminism' to value women mostly as incubating bodies, IMHO

do not appropriate my infertility and that of women like me to make spurious arguments - literally no one on this thread other than you is saying that

I have never ever ever felt other women regard women as incubators, its only men who do that

@Escapeplanning

The topic of the thread is very simple. A supreme court has delayed surgery for the child's parents see the protocol followed by the cosmetic surgeon as they want appropriate non surgical health care to be provided first.

Every insult and diversion possible is hauled out and chucked at people simply considering this judgement and the thread taken over by the person doing that who then shouts transphobic bingo at posters.

It's indicative of how difficult every aspect for parents with affected children becomes, and of the severe hostility experienced by people defending the Equality Act.

1. If you'd read the thread, you'd know how reticent I was to make this AAM.

2.The last point about fertility was explicitly requested of me.

1. The snowballing of this topic into every other trans topic is fairly described as 'transphobia' bingo.
2. Before i showed up, this thread was nothing but attacks on everyone involved except the absent mother.

Discussions about what constitutes good practice and good health care is not an attack.

What happens to children and the need for evidence and details of long term outcomes and the complications of surgeries is separate from what consenting adults decide to do to their own bodies.

Its not an attack on you personally to question whether or not these things should be done to children.

What has yet to ve determined is eveb what trans is. How can you treat something that you cant define. How can surgery or medication be used ti treat something when you don't know what that something is

The snowballing of this topic into every other trans topic is fairly described as 'transphobia' bingo.

The topic is and has remained focused on providing better treatment for children and teens (particularly females) and the potential effects of the current treatment.

Show us where 'every other trans topic' has been brought in.

Yes obviously its unethical to use children as guinea pigs.

Children also won't return to the clinics if they detransititon so there's little in the way of follow up information.

And its only been in the past few years where the number if girls showing up at the clinics has increased by 4400 percent

Its impossible to have any real long term info on any if this particularly when the reviews either haven't taken place or verdicts are still not back yet.

None of that is the fault of gender critical feminists and every other medical procedure is subject to scrutiny. I mean the appendectomy is a routine surgery provided theres no rupture, that doesn't mean drs still to this day dont keep records of complications rates or outcomes or continue to look into how the procedure can be improved.

That's medicine there's always room for improvement and that comes from looking at all the information whether it confirms your theories or not, whether it means admitting mistakes were made and techniques questioned without fear of the other drs reacting badly.

We can't expect to progress with anything if its taken personally as opposed to being based on whats best for future patients

Earlier I was reported and had a comment deleted because I used what I have now learned is a loaded word in describing why I felt empathy for the mother trying to save her daughter's breasts. I appreciate MN mods for striving to keep this debate civil as their stated intention was to be sensitive to parents potentially going through a similar situation.

In that spirit, I find this comment deeply, deeply offensive to all people currently experiencing infertility, people who know the pain of desperately wanting a child, a pain that can not be imagined at the age of 6, 10 or even 17:

You want to talk about cruel? How might an infertile person feel whenever trans children's (potential) infertility gets held aloft as the "worst" outcome of transition? It doesn't sound very 'feminism' to value women mostly as incubating bodies, IMHO.

To twist the pain of infertility as a means to justify the unjustifiable (permanently sterilizing children) is not in the spirit of civil debate. I can't tell you the number of friends and family I know who have experienced infertility who have wondered, "Did I wait too long? Should I not have take x medication, eaten x food? Should I have not done x sport? Is this because of my x health condition?" My own mother feared for 30 years that an emergency medical procedure I'd had had as a child made me sterile and she suffered tremendous guilt wondering...."what if I had caught it earlier? How did I miss the signs she was sick?"

Many of us are on this board because we know and love people who are trans. Otherwise, why would we give such a shit about protecting them from harm?

Before i showed up, this thread was nothing but attacks on everyone involved except the absent mother.

It really was not. Describing the mother as absent is inappropriate.