Conversion Therapy and a Survey of 25,896 LGBTQ youth

[Shizuku]

Trigger Warning - this post discusses suicidal feelings.

As the banning of conversion therapy is currently being debated, it might be useful for members of this group to see a survey of 25,896 LGBTQ youth which found that 57% of transgender and non-binary youth who have undergone conversion therapy report a suicide attempt in the last year:

www.thetrevorproject.org/survey-2019/?section=Conversion-Therapy-Change-Attempts

If anyone reading this is experiencing suicidal thoughts, please know that suicide is preventable, and that support is available. Here is a link to the Samaritans:

www.samaritans.org/

"Any suicide is a tragedy and that’s why transgender people deserve the best of unbiased, ethical and robust research, to avoid harm both to transitioners and detransitioners."

There we have a point of agreement.

"Keira’s Bell case made it clear; children are too young to know the repercussions of drastic decisions in their future lives and selves."

No, Bell's case made it clear that transition was probably wrong for her (I say "probably" because of course many detransitioners retransion). You can extrapolate from her experience to all trans children.

" treatment for distressed children should not advocate to damage their healthy body to fit with a ‘gender identity narrative’ no one can define outside restrictive and damaging stereotypes."

As I keep pointing out - gender identity is not about stereotypes. If it was, trans girls who are tomboys couldn't exist.

www.newsweek.com/transgender-kids-living-identity-develop-cis-children-1471729

"You don’t know me but feel confident to point to me as the cause of other people’s suffering. Shame on you."

Then I assume you do oppose conversion therapy on trans kids.

"Not all trans people think like you, many acknowledge their sex and the few adult ones I know are really upset at how younger trans are cared for."

Trans people are not a monolith - their opinions and personalities are as varied as cis people's. Pretty much all trans people I know are upset about the way trans kids are treated - the horrendous waiting times, the fact that many now are having to go abroad just to get basic treatment. The Bell case has certainly made it harder for them.

"Conversion therapy to me..."

Conversion therapy is not defined by you, or me - the definition stands independent of us both - in the case of trans people it is any attempt by someone to change the trans person's gender identity.

"Talking therapies should be available to explore MH before irreversible treatment."

Of course they should - one of the things trans people are most angry about is the difficulty trans kids have in accessing any care at all.

@Awiltu

f you are dismissing studies without control groups, you'll want to dismiss the Tavistock study then. You better let the people who are posting it know.

Ah, but the Tavistock study failed to show any benefit. You don't need a control group to show that an effect that didn't happen might have been due to something else.

As I mentioned - puberty blockers maintain the child's current state - you should expect to see no change in mental health, other than perhaps a small boost of relief to be on them, but also a level of anxiety as they watch their peers develop while they have to wait.

@Helleofabore

Just asking if the same link gets posted over and over, do we have repeat our posts about those links?

Tedious isn't it - someone says being trans is about stereotypes, so you post a link showing it isn't, then a few posts later someone says being trans is about stereotypes, so you post the link again showing it isn't and few posts later...

@Awiltu

It is almost as if you didn't realise that many of us have postgraduate science degrees or are working scientists and health professionals.

Yes indeed.

Shizuku doesn't seem to understand that a scientific study is not a definitive statement of fact. You can't just do the equivalent of throwing a study on the table and say "There, all sorted". Scientific research is like trying to solve a giant jigsaw puzzle with no picture to guide you, and a box that contains some incorrect pieces. Each study is a piece of the puzzle, but researchers have to work out where it fits into the whole picture, and whether the piece belongs there at all or is an error.

The reason that research papers publish their methodology and statistical analyses, rather than just their conclusions, is so that others in the field can evaluate whether the authors' conclusions are valid, and so that other researchers can, if they wish, replicate the study to make sure the results weren't an anomaly.

That's all a given.

@Thelnebriati

There is something decadent and fundamentally wrong with a society that turns out distressed children, and then decides the cure must be the children are broken and need drugs and surgery to fit in.

Well, being trans is biological, so you can only blame society or what they do about it, not for the fact that some children are trans.

"trying to pretend that middle aged transitioning males are the same as young, distraught teens. And demanding they are treated the same."

You do realise that almost all middle-aged trans people were once trans children, right? Most trans people will tell you that they knew there was a problem by the age of 3 or 4 or at least before their teens.

Of course, back then, very few dared come out, but luckily, there is greater acceptance now so we see big rises in the number of out trans kids.

@StellaAndCrow

It is so striking that OP is not interested in the wellbeing of children and young people. If they were, they'd be interested in proper discussion, getting as much evidence and data as possible, listening to detransitioners and other view points. It seems to me that instead they're just wanting a "gotcha". It's the only medical field I can think of that people are against collecting data about all outcomes.

I don't think there is any way you can deuce that I am not interested in the wellbeing of children from what I have posted.

I am all in favour of evidence - the more the better, and the better quality the better. As I have said several times on this thread, all the actual evidence presented thus far suggests that conversion therapy is harmful to trans people and absolutely no evidence whatsoever has been posted to suggest it is either harmless or beneficial. If you have such evidence, I am happy to look at it.

I have also stated very clearly on the other thread that it is vital that we both support detransitioners and hear their stories because that is one way we can improve treatment protocols.

Maybe you need to start actually listening to what I actually said rather than complaining about what you think I might have said.

If every trans child becomes a trans adult, are we not missing a great many middle aged transmen?

@CharlieParley

Asks the person who is telling literally thousands of highly trained, highly educated doctors and scientists who specialise in this field that they have got it wrong.

Science isn't a democracy. When every single expert in a field bar one lone voice agree, it still doesn't mean that all those experts are right and that one brave soul is wrong.

It's true that scientific consensus is arrived at by a collective of scientists in any given field largely agreeing on general points of a theory, but there is rarely agreement on all of the details. And as science evolves so does consensus. What was consensus ten years ago is today recognised as wrong, what is consensus today may be recognised as wrong in another ten.

Most of the time scientific consensus changes incrementally, imperceptibly until those changes add up to take consensus into a new direction. Sudden breakthroughs in science can also progress the state of knowledge, and sometimes those breakthroughs are made by one individual standing against all of their colleagues. One scientist who disagrees with the scientific consensus reached by her colleagues. There is huge resistance from the vast majority who all agree with the orthodoxy, then the evidence for the dissenting opinion mounts up and then the discipline slowly coalesces around a new consensus.

Take the origin of birds. You may not be old enough to remember, but when I was at primary school in the 70s, the idea that birds are the only living dinosaurs was ridiculed as abject nonsense. Birds and dinosaurs were closely related, but no more than that.

A British paleontologist called TH Huxley had proposed the theory in 1868, but it was rejected. There was no evidence in the available fossil record that birds could have evolved from dinosaurs.

Enter John Ostrom, arguably the most important paleontologist of the 20th century. His theories revolutionised the discipline, his work led to dinomania as well as Jurassic Park. He gave us the warmblooded agile dinosaurs we see in the movies, especially the fearsome velociraptors, modelled after deinonychus, discovered by Ostrom in 1964.

The same year he discovered a dinosaur skeleton that struck him as birdlike. Further discoveries and research led him to conclude that dinosaurs were indeed the direct ancestors of birds. He published his theory in 1973, revisiting Huxley's ideas from a hundred years earlier. And then he went through hell. He was called crazy. Deluded. For nearly 30 years, scientific consensus said he wasn't just wrong, but ridiculous for reviving a long discarded theory.

And then, in 2000 an excavation in China yielded the fossil evidence proving him right. He was vindicated. Today, scientific consensus regards those who dismiss Ostrom's theory on the origin of birds as the ridiculous ones.

Sadly, Ostrom himself could not enjoy his triumph. By then he was severely disabled and suffered from Alzheimer's. But his theory, once the opinion of one dissenter is now orthodoxy.

So while scientific consensus can be right, it can also be wrong. And appeals to believe one view because the mass of scientists agree on it are typically made to laypersons who don't understand how science works. That won't fly here.

Because scientific consensus does not in and of itself constitute proof for the veracity of a claim. You need to show your workings for that. And that means looking at these papers and analysing their methodology, their data and then examining whether their conclusions follow from their research and whether the conclusions are correctly represented in any claim made about them.

And we're doing just that and these papers fall short of your claims, Shizuku.

I do know how science works. I'm rather more persuaded by those who peer reviewed the studies before publication, than the anonymous people on a notoriously transphobic forum.

So tell me, is there anything in the evidence presented to suggest (even bearing in mind that all studies have limitations) that conversion therapy is harmful to trans people?

And are there any studies at all suggesting that conversion therapy is either harmless or beneficial to trans people?

@Voteinvain

Can someone tell me whether expressing dismay that their child wants to have a double mastectomy, and having lots of discussion with that child to ascertain whether this is the answer, or whether anything else is going on (which might also account for their ED and self-harm which started precisely at the onset of puberty and after their father announced that he was leaving the family home to set up life with another woman) That’s a hypothetical scenario by the way but do you get what I’m getting? Does it mean any thoughtful, gentle exploration of their over all mental health before prescribing hormone blockers or T?

Because if that’s what they mean by ‘conversion therapy’ when it comes to Transgender aspects of the Bill then that’s outrageous and dangerous. And how does one convert an ‘asexual’ person? They appear to be prominent in this Lobbying to get the ban.In the case of my children I think any parent would let their child work that one out for themselves. If they don’t want to have sex or feel no sexual attraction that’s their business - if this involves them wanting hormones and surgery I’d certainly want to be able to discuss and explore this.

It’s very confusing. I might write to Liz Truss and ask her what the definition of ‘conversion therapy’ is. It’s down to definition and language again isn’t it. We need to be singing from the same song sheet.

None of those things are conversion therapy - parent's being dismayed isn't conversion therapy - lots of discussion isn't conversion therapy.

Once again, conversion therapy is any attempt by someone to force a trans person's gender identity to change. It harms them.

Being asexual is a completely different issue to being trans.

Would saying, "You cannot change sex, you will always be male/female" be conversion therapy?

Would refusing to use chosen pronouns be conversion therapy?

Sorry, one more... would refusing to supply "gendered" clothing/toys be conversion therapy?

Once again, conversion therapy is any attempt by someone to force a trans person's gender identity to change. It harms them.

If conversion therapy changes someone's gender identity, what exactly is being changed for that person?

What is a gender identity?

As I mentioned - puberty blockers maintain the child's current state - you should expect to see no change in mental health, other than perhaps a small boost of relief to be on them, but also a level of anxiety as they watch their peers develop while they have to wait.

You can't set up a scientific study that proves there is no change. Statistical tests are designed to test for the presence of significant differences in a sample of a wider population. A non-significant result only shows that it wasn't possible to identify a difference in the sample tested, not that no difference exists in the population being sampled. Trying to infer that a non-significant result proves that no difference exists (e.g. in your example, that puberty maintain a child's current mental state) is called arguing to a null result and is statistically dubious.

Of course, back then, very few dared come out, but luckily, there is greater acceptance now so we see big rises in the number of out trans kids.

No we don't. Absolute nonsense.

We see a big rise in girls wanting to transition. And a big rise in adult men transitioning.

If all these young girls are accepted, where are all the young boys? And if all these middle aged men are accepted, where are the middle aged women?

Your repeated attempts to conflate middle aged men and teenage girls is patently transparent.

You do realise that the narratives of women married to middle aged transitioners are everywhere, don't you? Including on this very site. Thousands and thousands of posts.

And also the experience and narratives of parents of children who want to transition. On this very site.

The two cohorts couldn't be more different.

Did you address my question about Julia Serano, upthread? I couldn't see that you did.

Tedious isn't it - someone says being trans is about stereotypes, so you post a link showing it isn't, then a few posts later someone says being trans is about stereotypes, so you post the link again showing it isn't and few posts later...

If it's not about stereotypes why do all the links you posted describe 'conversion therapy' as taking all the 'women's clothes' away from males who want to be women?

Of course it's about stereotypes. What else is there?

Julia Serano actually called 'women being only good for one thing' a cliche. One that was sexually exciting.

A stereotype which couldn't be more damaging but we cant say, no, you're not actually a woman as it would be called 'conversion therapy' by the OP. It's not. It's profound disagreement.

Of course, there's no doubt that profound disagreement and pointing out the damage to women is viewed as negative by those concerned.

Honestly, the insult to the intelligence!

Many detransitioners retransion? You are going to play that card without admiting that many transitioners detransition because the ‘gender identity’ is a fallacy built up with stereotypes? @Shizuku

Glad that you want unbiased, ethical and robust research. Bell and many as her, show it is wrong and unlawful to medicate healthy bodies in the pursue of a lie. You can keep dressing that lie as you like.

I think the ‘notorious transphobic forum’ has done it for me. I’m out of this thread.

Once again, conversion therapy is any attempt by someone to force a trans person's gender identity to change. It harms them.

and what if the person has got their gender identity wrong?

That is such a big responsibility to put onto a child - a child who by your claim is also of an age that typically believes in Father Christmas and the tooth fairy.

And once a child has settled on their new gender identity and been celebrated and had major lifestyle changes made on their behalf by their parents and trusted adults, and being put on a path to medication and surgery - how hard do you think it is for the child to say 'wait, I'm not sure about this'.... even if they realised it wasn't right. Children don't tend to think about the future at all - depending on age it is often a window of a few hours so understanding the implications of changes that will last a lifetime are not within most children's capacity.

It is a huge responsibility to put on anyone - to make a declaration that leads to a drastic lifestyle change and taking treatment that is permanent and life changing. It is also not like realising you are gay - that doesn't require any body alterations or strong drugs - just deciding who you want to love.

Once again, conversion therapy is any attempt by someone to force a trans person's gender identity to change. It harms them.

How does safeguarding work then Shizuku? In prisons for instance. Is it conversion therapy to keep transwomen out of female prisons? On the basis of their sex?

Who is trying to change anybody's gender identity?

Shizuku you are remorseless. But I note you have not yet addressed the concern expressed by me and some others that your whole enterprise in this thread is vitiated by the non-existence of the basis for your claims, namely gender identity.

To be clear, since there is no scientific evidence that gender identity is real, all your references to scientific study purporting to show the best way of dealing with it are without merit.

Let me just offer you a reference to an article including this as a conclusion. It is by Alex Byrne, Professor of Philosophy at MIT: What is gender identity?

Here is a short quotation,
' If there is some kind of “gender identity” that is universal in humans, and which causes dysphoria when mismatched with sex, it remains elusive. No one has yet found a way of detecting its presence ... '

If Byrne is right, and there is no way of detecting the presence of gender identity (other than asking someone if they suffer from it, obviously), then all your 'evidence' is worthless. It would be simple to show he is wrong about this, though: tell us a (scientific) way of detecting its presence.

Without this, of course we draw the obvious conclusion. Do have a read of Alex Byrne's piece, in any case.

And once a child has settled on their new gender identity and been celebrated and had major lifestyle changes made on their behalf by their parents and trusted adults, and being put on a path to medication and surgery - how hard do you think it is for the child to say 'wait, I'm not sure about this'.... even if they realised it wasn't right. Children don't tend to think about the future at all - depending on age it is often a window of a few hours so understanding the implications of changes that will last a lifetime are not within most children's capacity.

It's possible to accept children as they without viewing their identity through the lens of gender or agreeing that their body is somehow wrong.