The horrific reality of child MtF transition

[StellaAndCrow]

I've just watched this video of Buck Angel interviewing Scarlett, a 19 yr old transwoman. She was given puberty blockers at 13 then cross-sex hormones.

I’m referring to Scarlett as “she” as Buck does in the title - I’m not sure what she prefers, but she does point out that her peers avoid talking to her for fear of offending her.

Scarlett tells her story of realising as a boy that she liked guys, hating her body at puberty, and thinking that she had to be “pretty” to attract guys. She went to a therapist to try to figure things out - was asked how she felt about long hair and dresses “I didn’t understand what gender identity was. I just knew I had effeminate mannerisms and liked guys". “They wanted to make it all about clothes”

I found the video absolutely gutting. She comes across as a lovely and thoughtful person, in such a difficult situation. She talks about how, when starting blockers:

• she was told she could go back at any time
• she was told that she ould be sterile, but didn’t know she would be castrated, lose her sexual function and suffer from atrophy
• she wasn’t told about the social and relationship difficulties:

“it’s the exact awkward existence I was trying to avoid as a feminine gay guy”

She also mentions “because my puberty was paused, the people who do want to be with me are not the most savoury of people”

Thanks for the info and links, very interesting (if horrifying)

Such an interesting thread and a powerful interview. I really admire Scarlett for opening up. But those are just about the worst interview skills I've ever seen in my life. Just shut the fuck up! It's almost a case study in the worst elements of mansplaining - he keeps interrupting her very heartfelt, emotionally sensitive, difficult narrative to explain to her how she was feeling and what was going on!

I’m friends with some older gay men who lament the lack of beautiful feminine young men nowadays. Because they all get told they’re straight trans women, instead of just being comfortable with being feminine gay men.

@talkingdeadscot

Thanks for the info and links, very interesting (if horrifying)

It is horrific isn't it?

It's also exactly why it's import to challenge views held by people such as your OH about PB's being a benign "pause button".

The trans lobby have historically been very effective in using language to whitewash the facts to make them more palatable and making emotive statements (eg better a trans child than a dead child) for which there is no empirical evidence.

Tbh I'm very uncomfortable with the term Trans Child.

A child suffering from gender dysphoria is not automatically trans nor should be assumed to be so. As noted below, if appropriately supported the vast majority of children will reconcile their gender identity with their biological sex if given the chance to so without medical (by which I mean PB's) intervention.

Labelling children as trans as soon as they exhibit concerns about their gender identity is in and off itself an affirmative behaviour that reduces their space to decide/evaluate for themselves who they are and how they want to present.

@OhHolyJesus

Their voice may "lighten" a bit but not to what would have been their natural pre- CSH register.

voices are very indicative of sex and I think the voice of a female on testosterone sounds different from a male. It's sometimes subtle and I can't quite put my finger (or ear) on what it is but a woman with a deep voice (from smoking or a sore throat or cross sex hormones) doesn't sound like a man.

Yes, it's almost always in the male upper register speaking voice, and tends to have a quality that reminds me of someone humming on wax paper over a comb. Even women who can sing in the tenor range in their natural voices sound different.

But it no longer sounds anything like a woman's voice either and most people will interpret it as a man's voice rather than a woman's.

My friends whose daughters have taken T say it is another nail in their hearts when they realise they will never hear their daughters sing or speak in their natural voices again.

Even if they stop taking blockers at 16/17 and don't take cross sex hormones they will not simply kick into natural puberty.

Actually, I think this is one of the (many) “unknowns”. As the vast majority of children put on puberty blockers go directly onto cross-sex hormones, there is little evidence either way.

It is suspected that there may be a set window during which puberty occurs, but I believe this is not fully evidenced - which is also one of the arguments that comes into play when discussing whether puberty blockers can ever be considered a “pause button “.

So here is a young man who has a heart wrenching story of how they didn't know what the route they were being put on would lead to - how becoming a transwomen at 13 would lead to the removal of their penis and testicles. A demonstration of both how important it is to use clear language, the lack of capacity of a child to decide and the harms of not doing so. But MNHQ decide to side with those who Scarlett describes are causing the harm and delete posts using the correct terminology. Why? Because some people don't want other 'Scarletts' to hear?

Something I've wondered, So if you take puberty blockers until you're in your 20s then stop do you then go through puberty? 30s? Is there a window on puberty occuring after which it just won't happen?

@KettlePolly

Something I've wondered, So if you take puberty blockers until you're in your 20s then stop do you then go through puberty? 30s? Is there a window on puberty occuring after which it just won't happen?

This is an unknown. The answer is there is probably a limit. There are some horror stories from gymnasts who were abused and starved who eventually went through puberty in their early to mid 20s, but that was due to different circumstances. I suspect that if you deny for long enough it just won’t happen. There are doctors who have published “theoretical” case studies on keeping someone “non-binary” perpetually and their conclusion - unsurprisingly - is that they think it’s ethical to do so. Of course it isn’t keeping someone “non-binary” it’s keeping someone prepubertal.

But MNHQ decide to side with those who Scarlett describes are causing the harm and delete posts using the correct terminology. Why? Because some people don't want other 'Scarletts' to hear?

I think this is it

It occurs to me with a certain amount of force that if one of the known and common side-effects of Lupron is suicidal impulses, along with Wikipedia's listing of

"Common side effects of leuprorelin injection include redness/burning/stinging/pain/bruising at the injection site, hot flashes (flushing), increased sweating, night sweats, tiredness, headache, upset stomach, nausea, diarrhea, impotence, testicular shrinkage, constipation, stomach pain, breast swelling or tenderness, acne, joint/muscle aches or pain, trouble sleeping (insomnia), reduced sexual interest, vaginal discomfort/dryness/itching/discharge, vaginal bleeding, swelling of the ankles/feet, increased urination at night, dizziness, breakthrough bleeding in a female child during the first two months of leuprorelin treatment, weakness, chills, clammy skin, skin redness, itching, or scaling, testicle pain, impotence, depression, or memory problems"

this would explain at least to some extent any increase in suicide among young trans people. Not that I can find any particular evidence that there actually is an increase in suicide by trans adolescents over that by ones who are not trans, as a percentage, but blimey, if there is they have drug-induced reasons for it!

Can someone PM me the gist of what was deleted? Is it that we’re not allowed to name a medical procedure as castration - whether surgical or chemical?

I assume it was a description of the procedure or the outcomes? I have been deleted for that before (I was actually repeating what Scott Newgent had said - and they know more about this than all of us put together).

@Leafstamp

Can someone PM me the gist of what was deleted? Is it that we’re not allowed to name a medical procedure as castration - whether surgical or chemical?

Yes

A while ago I was on a hobby discord group which was almost entirely women except for one very young (18 y o) trans man. He was from the US, and got very angry over some older (40+) U.K. members of the group discussing endometriosis and perimenopause, because it was “triggering” - but the explicit reason being discussion of how difficult it was to get a hysterectomy for severe endometriosis and the pros and cons. Not because this was too gynocentric, but because older women were discussing the downsides of hysterectomy - organ prolapse, hormone issues etc.

It turned out that the young transman had literally never been told there were any downsides to complete hysterectomy and ovarian removal. It came as a great shock to him that this could cause pelvic organ prolapse, osteoporosis, all the other complications. The whole medical transition pathway had been presented to this (American) teenager - already on high doses of testosterone - as entirely risk free. His reaction to hearing that there might be physical downsides was a kind of terrified rage.

He had also been open about (unrelated) serious medical issues and family problems dating back to childhood, especially a complicated relationship with his mother, which it was not hard to see had clearly been part of the desire to transition. But I found it especially heartbreaking that he had clearly not been told the truth about what is a very serious medical procedure, which had been presented as easy and without future consequences. 😢

That really is wicked, isn't it. Poor kid. I hope he was lucky and hasn't had serious side-effects.

I think he is still on testosterone but hasn’t yet had a surgical transition - not sure about the top surgery. Last I heard he was also telling the older women they were not allowed to complain about their male partners because hearing bad things about men made him regret having chosen to be a man 😟

Young kids and even older teenagers haven’t got much sense of life in general, even if they believe they have. Anyone who allows/encourages them to take irreversible medical and surgical steps is criminally irresponsible. ☹️

Of people can’t bear to hear anything negative in their lives it certainly points to a dangerously fragile nature.

@toffeebutterpopcorn

Of people can’t bear to hear anything negative in their lives it certainly points to a dangerously fragile nature.

I'm not so sure tbh.

I think it's true in some cases, but I think others have "learned" predominantly through SM that the best way to "win" any discussion is to centre how "you" feel and what's "triggering" to you.

It's an "easy" way to shut down discussion because most people don't want to go out of their way to upset anyone.

The problem is the truth is often uncomfortable and upsetting - refusing to acknowledge that doesn't make something untrue.

I'd also reference a comment (sorry can't remember the source - maybe an Interview or Tweet) from (transsexual) Miranda Yardley when she pointedly asserted that a lack of mental fortitude and understanding of the limits and downsides of transition should be a red flag for anyone being allowed to transition at all.

I worked as a therapist back in the day - sorry but if you won’t hear then you need to seriously consider (what the kids would say these days) ‘your truth’ and how it sits in relation to reality and what’s actually best for you.

@TrifleCat

I can’t help but wondering how different Scarlett’s life would be if Scarlett had been encouraged to embrace being a gay male.

This hits close to home. I had a hard time watching it. A lovely person who deserved so much more. Boys who don't fit some arbitrary mode of masculinity need acceptance, not puberty blockers.

But why would medical practitioners not tell young people the truth about the side effects and downsides of these treatments and surgeries? It's really strange.

I understand that big pharma benefit from a lot of people transitioning and being medicated all their lives. But doctors themselves surely stand to be disastrously sued if they misinform people who end up changing their mind or just being harmed by the realities of the situation. Especially in the US you would have thought.

It's sometimes said that professionals just go along with it so as not to be labelled transphobic, but explaining the downsides of surgery is just a basic of any doctor's job isn't it? I had a consultation the other day about very minor surgery and got the full rundown of risks and side effects, even very rare ones.

Private medicine, and follow the money, perhaps?

After all, there are lots of crowdfunders for these surgeries, which if they were NHS surely shouldn't be necessary?