Stonewall's response to Transgender Trend

[Eachpeachporch]

I wonder if anyone has had the experience of sharing the Transgender Trend schools resource pack and getting Stonewall's response to it as a reply? Does anyone have any thoughts on what Stonewall says here? Any help much appreciated! www.stonewall.org.uk/node/62946

@DoubleTweenQueen

You have likely seen this already, however the Finnish have recognised the upsurge and cohort switch and have revised their treatment approach to be additionally cautious, and are expecting to improve learnings as they navigate the new landscape: segm.org/sites/default/files/Finnish_Guidelines_2020_Minors_Unofficial%20Translation.pdf

Of note, in review of applicable studies:

In a larger study consisting of 201 adolescents, 101 patients with the average age of 15.5 (12-18 years) started an 18-month psychological supportive intervention, and, additionally at six months, pubertal development was suppressed by starting GnRH analogue treatment. The other cohort of 100 only received psychological supportive intervention for 18 months. In both groups, statistically significant increases in global psychosocial functioning were found at 12 and 18 months; among those having received psychological intervention alone, the improvement in global functioning was already significant at the 6-month mark. Both studies lack long-term treatment follow-up into adulthood.

I don’t have the study reference to hand as the Appendix is not available in this translated format. I could probably find it though, if any interest.

But this study would obviously fall far short of your requirements for us to consider - where is the reference to the matched cohort design? What a poorly designed study eh, not to include that.

Of course you will know full well that the baseline characteristics for both cohorts are likely very different - namely in the degree to which they experienced gender dysphoria in the first place - those experiencing greater distress (amongst other considerations), would have been more likely to be put forward for GnRH analogues in addition to psychological intervention, and those for whom it was considered that their distress could be adequately managed by psychological intervention alone of course were in that cohort.

You will, of course, know that. It would be unethical to proceed in any other way - unless you think they're just taking the 270 kids and randomly assigning them to a treatment group with no individualised plan?

So this would obviously fall far, far short of the rigorous study design that you need to consider, so I don't know why you're even referring to it? It doesn't count right? Just like the the scores of studies I have linked to.

And it's Finnish not UK based evidence. I'm not allowed to include any non-UK evidence because it's not relevant to our particular culture and population, but you apparently are?

But of course, as it happens the results you have found show that all cohorts fared well.

And the authors conclusions are entirely inline with what I posted on this thread:

"The first-line intervention for gender variance during childhood and adolescent years is psychosocial support and, as necessary, gender-explorative therapy and treatment for comorbid psychiatric disorders"

I want to see good psychological and social support for trans-identified young people. GC feminism does not want to allow a culture that would facilitate that.

did think Gish Gallop but I wanted to give suggestions time to answer. Because it did feel like Gish Gallop.

It does.

@suggestionsplease1 I suggest you go back and read the linked document. It’s not, in itself, a study, which you would know if you’d looked at it. You may need to breath into a paper bag for a few minutes beforehand.

Funny how professional GIDS clinicians, psychoanalysts, scientists, and other professionals who work with people experiencing gender dysphoria never use the term GC.

Sorry if this has already been posted, but the latest edition to the gender a wider lens podcast has an interview with Finnish adolescent psychiatrist Riittakerttu Kaltiala, who also noticed, reported and researched the increasing number of natal girls in the gender identity service.

gender-a-wider-lens.captivate.fm/

@Scraggythang Thankyou. Excellent podcast - I urge everyone to subscribe! :)

I want to see good psychological and social support for trans-identified young people. GC feminism does not want to allow a culture that would facilitate that.

I have said it on other threads, and I say it again on this thread. Your prejudice against people who disagree with you is very clear and shows very clearly on this thread, as it does on other threads.

GC feminism does not want to allow a culture that would facilitate that.

What a fucking load of bollocks!

Do you even know what many posters on this very thread advocate for? Are you just so entrenched in your prejudice you want to continue to take pops at posters of this board rather than actually engage?

Sue Evans - 40+ years psychoanalyst, formerly of Tavistock GIDS so with extensive experience in the area, speaks to the new phenomenon of cohort growth, particularly adolescent girls, in the EBSWA webinar linked on the previous page, also.

[quote DoubleTweenQueen]@suggestionsplease1 I suggest you go back and read the linked document. It’s not, in itself, a study, which you would know if you’d looked at it. You may need to breath into a paper bag for a few minutes beforehand.

Funny how professional GIDS clinicians, psychoanalysts, scientists, and other professionals who work with people experiencing gender dysphoria never use the term GC.[/quote]
Sorry but that's not really an answer, is it?

You will know full well from the link that you gave that any competent researcher is able to appreciate the issues that I raised and the studies that you are referring to can not possibly be matched cohort designs.

Therefore, why are you linking to them when they don't achieve the robust study design you say is necessary for consideration in this area?

It's a bit hypocritical isn't it?

And we read it with interest that it might form the basis of further research.

DoubleTweenQueen was upfront about the limitations of this research.

suggestionsplease1

Any thoughts as to my question about what you believe are the causes of gender dysphoria in say, 13-year-old girls?

And do you agree that finding a cure would be beneficial. For both 13-year-old girls, and adult men and women.

I, too, am most keen to hear this answer.

Fully caught up now…

… oh I do hope we haven’t hit another dead end…

@Datun

suggestionsplease1

Any thoughts as to my question about what you believe are the causes of gender dysphoria in say, 13-year-old girls?

And do you agree that finding a cure would be beneficial. For both 13-year-old girls, and adult men and women.

Well it's around that age or earlier that girls are experiencing the beginnings of signifiers of womanhood, periods, breasts growing, so it's not too surprising that gender dysphoria would likely onset with those things if it is going to occur at all.

Nowadays there is a lot more knowledge and awareness of medical possibilities that weren't generally known about before, so the same expressions of distress are likely more visibly directed towards that end nowadays rather than sublimated. If you were born in the 1960's for eg, it just would never have entered your head that a girl could medically transition. So how could you aim at or express a goal that didn't (seem to) exist at the time?

I have a friend (yes I know, sample n = 1) who is a mid 50's woman, who has for the entirety of her life felt real unhappiness and disgust with her female form and a sense that she should have been born a boy. She has been unable to have intimate relationships due to this. She looks on these options now with envy, that happiness and relationships might have been possible for her had she been in her teens at this time, but she considers at her age that that ship has sailed.

But I don't dismiss the possibility of an element of social contagion in what is happening presently amongst young girls. But how do you think those teenager are going to feel supported if you start lecturing them about that? We've all been through the teenage years, I think we all have an idea that the most sure fire way to get a teenager to double down on a position is to patronise them and tell them how wrong they are. Which is why I support a more relaxed approach to gender issues in general - if as a parent you accept the pronouns and name that your child wishes and at the same time build nothing into it then you dissipate the tension around the issue, allowing that young person to explore with support and feeling more secure that they can return to their original gender ID if that is right for them further down the line.

I find your 2nd sentence difficult - it has connotations of the times people wanted to find a cure for homosexuality. I'm quite happy being a gay woman myself, I don't want a cure, and I imagine many trans people might say the same - they don't want a cure that would stop them desiring to be and to be recognised as they other sex, they just want to be the sex that they identify as and for others to acknowledge that.

Cure suggests you feel trans-identified people have a problem. The word cure was used to suggest gay people had a problem too. I think most of us would turn around now and say that it is not us that have the problem; it's society that has a problem with us.

So what is this cure you're hoping for, and who is it beneficial for - the people who are trans identified, or yourself (I say that generally for people articulating this idea, not you personally) so that you might feel more comfortable?

😁 Well that came as a complete surprise.

And yet, adults who suffer from gender dysphoria have claimed that they would like to not suffer from gender dysphoria. It is NOT like being gay according to them. So, do we take your word for it suggestions, or others who have been through at great deal of support for their gender dysphoria to be able to cope with their material reality?

And you keep saying you are uncomfortable with medical transition for children and teenagers, yet keep posting material supporting medicalised transition for teenagers.

But I don't dismiss the possibility of an element of social contagion in what is happening presently amongst young girls. But how do you think those teenager are going to feel supported if you start lecturing them about that?

Why would you lecture young girls about the entirely rational reaction to being objectified in a porn soaked environment?

No, you tackle the cause, not the symptom.

One way of doing that is to take trans ideology out of schools, and replace it with feminism. Teach girls, and boys, what is happening and how to stop it.

And I don't know how you're not permanently cross eyed with the dual opinion that gender dysphoria can cause suicide and depression and yet you don't think it should be cured.

Plus, yet again, you have to conflate it with something completely different in order to purloin an argument that no-one's asked you about in the first place!

Seriously, I don't think I've ever heard anything more contradictory.

Or predictable.

The number of times I've listened to how awful gender dysphoria is, causing depression, suicide and misery, which is a major cornerstone of 'be kind' and yet no one seems to want a cure for it.

For anyone interested in the study referred to in the Finnish review, a search suggests that it is this one (the relevant details match up):

Costa R, Dunsford M, Skagerberg E, Holt V, Carmichael P, Colizzi M. Psychological support, puberty suppression, and psychosocial functioning in adolescents with gender dysphoria. J Sex Med 2015;12:2206–2214

To answer some of suggestionsplease1's questions, as the full text is behind a paywall:

And it's Finnish not UK based evidence. I'm not allowed to include any non-UK evidence because it's not relevant to our particular culture and population, but you apparently are?

It's a UK study conducted in London at GIDS.

But this study would obviously fall far short of your requirements for us to consider - where is the reference to the matched cohort design? What a poorly designed study eh, not to include that.

This was a longitudinal study of 2 cohorts of gender-dysphoric young people. All 201 participants received psychological assessment and intervention for 6 months via GIDS before eligibility for puberty blockers was assessed. At the 6-month point, participants who were assessed as eligible for puberty blockers were assigned to one of 2 cohorts.The immediate-eligibility cohort received psychological support plus pharmacological puberty suppression, while the delayed-eligibility cohort received psychological support only. Assignment to the delayed-eligibility cohort was on the following basis: "In those specific cases clinicians needed more time to make the decision of starting GnRHa because of possible comorbid psychiatric problems and/or psychological difficulties."

Both cohorts were followed up 12 months and 18 months. Results for both cohorts were compared to a large sample (N=169) of young individuals without observed psychological/psychiatric symptoms who completed the same adolescent psychosocial function measures as the two gender-dysphoric groups.

Of course you will know full well that the baseline characteristics for both cohorts are likely very different - namely in the degree to which they experienced gender dysphoria in the first place - those experiencing greater distress (amongst other considerations), would have been more likely to be put forward for GnRH analogues in addition to psychological intervention, and those for whom it was considered that their distress could be adequately managed by psychological intervention alone of course were in that cohort.

No, the opposite was true. The cohort assigned to the immediate-eligibility group had numerically (though not statistically) higher measures of psychosocial function than the delayed-eligibility group, and the delayed group were assigned to that cohort precisely because they demonstrated signs of more significant psychiatric or psychological difficulties.

You will, of course, know that. It would be unethical to proceed in any other way - unless you think they're just taking the 270 kids and randomly assigning them to a treatment group with no individualised plan?

It is not unethical to compare two treatment pathways where definitive objective evidence of clinical benefit is lacking, precisely in order to collect that missing evidence.

But of course, as it happens the results you have found show that all cohorts fared well.

The results are more nuanced than that.

The study showed that measures of psychosocial function improved significantly across the entire participant group (pooled across both cohorts) after 6 months of psychological intervention and support. However, when each group was considered separately, significant improvement in psychosocial function was observed only in the delayed-eligibility cohort, who (according to the criteria for assignment to that cohort) showed signs of more serious psychological and psychiatric difficulties.

From the 6-month point, where the 2 cohorts diverged in the treatment received, the immediate-eligibility group (who received puberty blockers plus psychological support) showed significant improvement in psychosocial function at the 12- and 18-month follow-up points, compared to the 6-month point.

In contrast, the delayed-eligibility group (who received psychological support only) showed small numerical improvements in psychosocial function measures at 12 and 18 months, which were not statistically significant. However, in the delayed-eligibility group, psychosocial function at 12 and 18 months remained significantly better than at baseline (prior to starting any psychological intervention).

Also worth noting that, despite the apparent differences between outcomes for each cohort, direct comparison of psychosocial function at 18 months showed no statistically significant difference in psychosocial function between the group that had received puberty blockers plus psychological intervention and the group that had received psychological intervention only.

So this would obviously fall far, far short of the rigorous study design that you need to consider, so I don't know why you're even referring to it? It doesn't count right? Just like the the scores of studies I have linked to.

The study is flawed, but not for the reasons you suggest.

This study had enormous problems with participant retention. By the 12-month time point, less than 2/3 of participants remained in each cohort, and by the 18-month point, only around 1/3 of participants in each cohort remained in the study. The reasons for loss to follow-up are not reported, so we have no idea whether these participants left because their mental health improved or because it worsened. That is a huge drop-out rate - so big that it raises questions about how well-matched the final cohorts remaining after 18 months were, and makes it very difficult to draw meaningful conclusions about the impact of puberty blockers.

The summary version - psychological intervention improves mental health in gender dysphoric adolescents, especially those who are experiencing greater psychological difficulties or psychiatric comorbidities. Any additive benefit of puberty blockers is difficult to evaluate due to the very high dropout rate during follow-up.

Awiltu

Thank you for the summary.

That is hugely interesting. The study and the drop off rates. I would have loved to see the reason for drop off. It most likely confirms the clinics really were not following up people.

However, were those drop offs due to going private, desistance with improved mental health care, moving to adult services ?

And if these patients started PBs surely they need following up for health checks regardless of transition status? Because they should be monitored after such a cocktail.

Interview with Dr Littman, the person who coined the term ROGD, for your interest:

I have a friend (yes I know, sample n = 1) who is a mid 50's woman, who has for the entirety of her life felt real unhappiness and disgust with her female form and a sense that she should have been born a boy. She has been unable to have intimate relationships due to this. She looks on these options now with envy, that happiness and relationships might have been possible for her had she been in her teens at this time, but she considers at her age that that ship has sailed.

I'm quite happy being a gay woman myself, I don't want a cure, and I imagine many trans people might say the same - they don't want a cure that would stop them desiring to be and to be recognised as they other sex, they just want to be the sex that they identify as and for others to acknowledge that.

Cure suggests you feel trans-identified people have a problem. The word cure was used to suggest gay people had a problem too. I think most of us would turn around now and say that it is not us that have the problem; it's society that has a problem with us.

Are you saying that your friend's disgust with her female body is entirely due to 'society'? How would a change in societal attitudes help such a person to accept her body and enable her to have intimate relationships? Is she a lesbian who has internalised the homophobia around her to the extent that she thinks, like Fox Fisher, that homosexual relationships are 'deviant'?

You are comparing the experiences of two very different people: a desperately unhappy woman who hates her body and as a result has found intimate relationships difficult, and you, a gay woman who is happy with her sexuality, and saying they are somehow the same. In what way are they the same?

If your friend could be cured of her disgust with her body (and her internalised homophobia if she is same-sex attracted), why do you think this would be such a terrible outcome? Why do you think altering her body, and becoming a lifelong medical patient, is preferable?

Not only are sexual orientation and transgenderism not the same, the one directly conflicts with the other. Which is why invoking homosexuality to endorse transgenderism is so intellectually dishonest.

The Denton report details the tactic of linking them together to gain public support. It doesn't work irl. Not least because a proponent of transgenderism is unable to reconcile the definition of sexual orientation with gender ideology.

Also note how 'people with gender dysphoria' and 'trans people' get swapped in and out at an alarming rate, depending on whether the argument being had is about treatment or rights.

Also note how 'people with gender dysphoria' and 'trans people' get swapped in and out at an alarming rate, depending on whether the argument being had is about treatment or rights.

Very very true. Worth focussing on this wording.

@Ereshkigalangcleg

Also note how 'people with gender dysphoria' and 'trans people' get swapped in and out at an alarming rate, depending on whether the argument being had is about treatment or rights.

Very very true. Worth focussing on this wording.

Indeed. I asked about gender dysphoria. The response is firstly a meaningless anecdote. Then an equally meaningless but dishonest conflation of homosexuality with transgenderism. Linking to talking of transgenderism in terms of human rights. And then trying to compare it with gay rights when transgenderism directly conflicts with the definition of homosexuality under the equality act.

I didn't ask about any of those things!

However, I knew what the answer would be.

I don't even care what that poster thinks, to be honest. I just quite enjoy seeing the scrabbling around to find an answer that means no they don't want a cure for gender dysphoria and they're not really interested in exploring the causes of it.

But will continue to amplify the need for its treatment, and how people with it are so desperately unhappy.

Meaningless jibber jabber.

It really does come down to that datun.

On one hand we are told that gender dysphoria is a debilitating condition to suffer from, including death by suicide .... and then we see the activist stance ' Cure suggests you feel trans-identified people have a problem. The word cure was used to suggest gay people had a problem too. I think most of us would turn around now and say that it is not us that have the problem; it's society that has a problem with us. '

There are people who have suffered gender dysphoria all their life, some who have transitioned and some who have not, who state that they have worked so hard to reduce the dysphoria. Transitioning works only for some people with gender dysphoria, it does not work for others. There are transitioners telling the world that transitioning has not alleviated their dysphoria.

Yet, we have posters and activists loudly talking over the top of these people. Shutting down their experiences.

And then we come to the other hand. That trans are now such a very wide group that gender dysphoria is now just one group of those who transition. Yet. They are usually the ones used in the emotional manipulation of the general population.

I do discount adults who are fully entrenched in their political agenda who declare that they would have transitioned as a child/teen. Because, the reality is, they could just as likely not transitioned at that age. And if they had received high quality mental health care earlier, which I think that we all can agree on, they might not have been in the situation as an older adult of making that statement.

They are also making that statement with the benefit of 'hindsight', not the optimism of the future or alternatively having to evaluate a future of significant medical issues (a future not so optimistic). Including very early loss of ovaries which may have meant dramatic life shortening dementia or other serious side effects. Let's not forget the serious side effects of these treatments on the female body.

All they are doing in reality, is pushing their political agenda and downplaying the fact that they really may not have chosen that very risk path, but want to encourage children and teenagers to do so.

And then we come to the other hand. That trans are now such a very wide group that gender dysphoria is now just one group of those who transition.

Indeed.

And I can easily see why those who claim they have gender euphoria, wouldn't want to find any kind of cure, or cause.

Why would you want to stop something that made you feel so euphoric?