Elliot Page undergoes “lifesaving” “top surgery”

[OnWednesdaysWeWearMink]

BBC R1 news beat has just reported that Elliot page has undergone “life saving” “top surgery”.

Here is the related web article: www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-57239448

This reporting perpetuates the narrative that people will commit suicide if they don’t get the right sort of treatment. I find it deeply irresponsible. Does anyone know if Samaritans are tackling this sort of coverage in their media guidelines? I’d hope work is going on behind the scenes as they are a fantastic charity. (I assume they are not captured?)

A double mastectomy is usually lifesaving when it comes to breast cancer... so I find calling an elective cosmetic procedure lifesaving pretty insulting. But that’s just me being petty and not the main point.

But I’ve got to say, when asking for citations, going to birth a baby as opposed to going to ice a cake is inspired in admiration!

Outlandish views? I presume this includes People can't change sex and There is no such thing as a gendered brain?

It seems very obvious, to me, that publicising a celebrity’s elective mastectomy with claims that it was “life-saving” may convince many troubled teenagers that they need their breasts removed too. Or that maybe they should consider suicide?

Could anyone complaining about Mumsnetters’ concern tell me how this is a good thing?

I think what you really mean is you'll get hounded off the board by a hive mind, whose extreme views have largely been rejected by civilised society.

You're hilarious "extreme views" like acknowledging the existence of biological sex, in response to "their brains are literally made like the brain of their identified gender".

I think what you really mean is you'll get hounded off the board by a hive mind, whose extreme views have largely been rejected by civilised society.

I think the view that men should be able to choose to be placed in a women's prison and the women get no choice other than to deal with it is an extreme view and I am astonished that I civilised society thinks this is ok.

Do you think that's okay?

Has anyone convinced the Farmer's Union that sex is a social construct yet, and that assuming the sex of their livestock is transphobic, that the cows gender or that of a day old chick is what matters?

To go back to the “gendered brain” idea, I found this metadata study (not paywalled):

Structural, Functional, and Metabolic Brain Differences as a Function of Gender Identity or Sexual Orientation: A Systematic Review of the Human Neuroimaging Literature

link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10508-021-02005-9

This review systematically explored structural, functional, and metabolic features of the cisgender brain compared with the transgender brain before hormonal treatment and the heterosexual brain compared to the homosexual brain from the analysis of the neuroimaging literature up to 2018, and identified and discussed subsequent studies published up to March 2021. Our main aim was to help identifying neuroradiological brain features that have been related to human sexuality to contribute to the understanding of the biological elements involved in gender identity and sexual orientation. We analyzed 39 studies on gender identity and 24 on sexual orientation. Our results suggest that some neuroanatomical, neurophysiological, and neurometabolic features in transgender individuals resemble those of their experienced gender despite the majority resembling those from their natal sex. In homosexual individuals the majority resemble those of their same-sex heterosexual population rather than their opposite-sex heterosexual population. However, it is always difficult to interpret findings with noninvasive neuroimaging. Given the gross nature of these measures, it is possible that more differences too subtle to measure with available tools yet contributing to gender identity and sexual orientation could be found. Conflicting results contributed to the difficulty of identifying specific brain features which consistently differ between cisgender and transgender or between heterosexual and homosexual groups. The small number of studies, the small-to-moderate sample size of each study, and the heterogeneity of the investigations made it impossible to meta-analyze all the data extracted. Further studies are necessary to increase the understanding of the neurological substrates of human sexuality.

It literally isn’t very conclusive.

Our results suggest that some neuroanatomical, neurophysiological, and neurometabolic features in transgender individuals resemble those of their experienced gender despite the majority resembling those from their natal sex.

So brains of transgendered individuals are different from those of the opposite sex.

So brains of transgendered individuals are different from those of the opposite sex.

Wow, I thought that was an extreme belief that has been rejected by civilised society!

I read it as “transgender brains may have some features of their gender ID but they generally match the features of natal sex, but to be honest we don’t really know because the studies are small, have been conducted in using different methodologies and the results often conflict with each other.”

'suggest'
'some'
'resemble'

Anyone who has ever written an academic paper will tell you that those researchers are literally saying 'the currently available evidence doesn't add up to any actual conclusion'.

What they are literally not saying is 'brains of transgendered individuals are different from those of the opposite sex'

But what they are also NOT saying is that they even 'resemble' brains of the opposite sex.

Yes, the currently available evidence doesn't add up to any actual conclusion is quite literally what they were saying

(I have a similar set of weasel words for reports too).

Dont forget that non-binary is valid.
What do non-binary brains look like?
Half pink, half blue maybe?

(I have a similar set of weasel words for reports too)

I may not be a neuroscientist but I know how to say 'um, dunno tbh' when writing for publication

I need to re-read Cordelia Fine I think.

The results from our systematic review and meta-analyses do not allow us to conclude on the specific brain pheno- types differential for each of the groups covered by this review.

I think that’s the fancy way of saying “umm, dunno”

That about sums it up. Like Eskimos and snow, academics have 174 different ways to say I don't have the foggiest.

So 'hounded off' = 'people may politely ask for the references/links/evidence you've cited'

Conflicting results contributed to the difficulty of identifying specific brain features which consistently differ between cisgender and transgender or between heterosexual and homosexual groups. The small number of studies, the small-to-moderate sample size of each study, and the heterogeneity of the investigations made it impossible to meta-analyze all the data extracted.

Well, that's conclusive enough for me, I must say.

Goodness me people, I work full time (cutting it fine to the due date 😳) My apologies for having to wait for a lunch break to check social media …

To answer your point about retrospective searching - I don’t keep every article I read. This isn’t my area of specialism - but I have trans clients and parents of trans children so have read and trained around it but it’s not something I keep scores of research on- so yes, I will need to find the articles I’ve read in the past but it’ll probably not a priority with finishing work and a baby on the way.

But criticisms heard loud and clear and I really should keep a reference list of interesting papers/training even if I don’t keep everything I’ve ever read/done!

Glad you've been hounded back on here weaving now take it easy and best wishes for the birth!

How difficult can it be to produce a few links? Even for a little pink fluffy candy floss ladybrain?

WeavingWandering. But I thought you said your work had been published. Why wouldn't you have a copy of that?

Goodness me, many many of us work full time I'm sure, but don't make vague claims then refuse to back them up. You had time to post your claims, but are now sadly out of time to provide the goods, as you urgently have to produce a human. Ok then.

She never said she had published in this exact space and citing her work would reveal her identity, which isn't fair.

This isn't just about being able to spout a rollerdex of evidence. From this thread I am guessing you are some type of therapist, apologies if I misconstrued. As a Clinician it is so vital that your practice is informed by evidence and that you are really adept at critically assessing evidence before incorporating changes in your practice.

It is because of your profession that I found your casual remarks about gendered brains so shocking. You work with vulnerable people, including trans people, how you think and what you say really matters. It is totally understandable to be half arsed in front of a bunch of strangers on mumsnet, but in your clinical practice, no way.