It's just so sad

[Zerogravity]

Can't say this in real life so am writing it here....a friend of mine's daughter started identitying as a boy a few years ago now. This morning he posted mastectomy photos. (And yes, I am saying he now). It just makes me feel so sad that he didn't feel it was possible to transition without surgery but I also hope that he won't regret it iyswim? I don't really understand how this surgery can have become so acceptable in such a short space of time. It's brutal.😥

I don’t feel it’s appropriate to congratulate someone for opting to remove healthy body parts. Or to congratulate them for ‘coming out’ to the world that they have severe alternate sex ideation to the point they cannot enjoy life without removing healthy body parts. Not sure how it’s different from someone wanting the life of a one-armer and cutting their arm off.

@GoodJanetBadJanet and @Discovereads do you think there should be any limits to the right to bodily autonomy? Should people be able to have their limbs amputated on request, for example? This actually happened in an NHS hospital until the surgeon doing the operations was told to stop.

www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2000/12/a-new-way-to-be-mad/304671/

Who should pay for this amputation of healthy body parts? Do you think the NHS should pay for these totally unnecessary operations?

Would the same apply if someone was dysphoric and distressing to have their ears, or feet, or hands touched? If not, why not?

@FiddlefigOnTheRoof yes indeed, the way that girls seem to be encouraged to think that these surgeries will solve all their problems and life will be great — that seems a dangerous fantasy that’s a red flag in itself.

Surely people undertaking huge life-changing surgeries used to get better psychological support that stressed that it doesn’t magically solve all problems? You get better counselling for having a gastric band procedure on the NHS than these girls seem to be having to cut healthy normal bits of their bodies off!

This is one of the larger (or many) contradictions as the heart of the incoherent narrative on this subject, the claim that they have no psychological or physical condition, so do not need counselling, but do want a surgeon on the NHS to carry out surgery on them.

I’ve been deleted upthread for suggesting that gender dysphoria is a psychiatric condition, apparently this is very offensive.

It’s in the bloody name, FFS - “dysphoria” is a psychiatric term 😡 and gender dysphoria is listed as a psychiatric condition.

The having it both ways is just downright idiotic - it’s offensive to call it a psychiatric condition (even though that’s bare fact, it is); but it’s a condition so terrible breasts must be cut off as a clinical treatment? It’s juvenile.

This is the second time in a month I’ve been deleted for stating pure medical fact and it’s getting bloody ridiculous now, MN.

It’s still (rightly, from what I can see) listed as a condition in the DSM, so no-one should have posts deleted for repeating what the authoritative medical guide says on it.

Those trying to claim it’s not a psychological condition are implying a completely unevidenced innate feeling of what sex a person is, as though we have a sexed soul.

This seems a-priori completely unevidenced.

Excellent question, and the only answer possible is what Abigail Shrier calls “social contagion”, made possible by ready access to the Internet.

'First do no harm'

When is comes to cosmetic surgery this is often disregarded. Every time anaesthetic is used there is potential to harm.

It is tragic. People say it's none of my business but we are beginning to see the distress that detransioners have gone through. The regret and the real problems they have to deal with. We do need to speak up and not allow this catastrophic surgery to become an easy choice.

A few other potential answers:

-- Older trans men may be more financially secure and so don't resort to fundraisers which they have to publicise in order to access surgery, if they wish to go for surgery privately.

-- Older trans men may not be as active on social media, so don't come to the attention of the more general media or GC Twitter as much.

-- Older trans men don't wish to be infantilised (for example, Stock posted on Twitter within the last day or two that gender-confirming surgery shouldn't be allowed until at least 25) so keep quiet.

-- Some older people may be of a generation which just tends to keep off social media more than younger people, so they pass without (online) notice.

-- Individual people are entitled to do as they please; their medical history is nobody else's business.

You are of course all welcome to say 'the stories of a handful of people don't count' or 'anecdote', if you wish, but FWIW I know of a good dozen or so trans guys who had their top surgery in their 30s and 40s who are thrilled with the results and generally much happier having come out.

(points 2 and 4 are pretty much the same point, apologies.)

Sneakers, then why wouldn’t all that apply to all the older trans women? We hear loads about and from them.

Snekkes sorry, autocorrect

I totally agree with you actually. I also think that women under the age of 30 shouldn't be allowed to have abortions either- they aren't mature enough until then to really understand such a brutal and radical procedure. And they shouldn't be allowed to decide whether or not they breastfeed their infants - until the age of 30 someone else needs to make that decision for them as I'm not sure that they would really understand the benefits/drawbacks.

Oh and don't get me started on the vote....

The relative numbers of male and female adults referred to the GIC at the Tavistock is here

If you don't like the look of that link you can go to their FOI disclosure log and look for the request FOI 19-20344 GIC Referral Data 2017-19 by Natal Sex under 2019-2020.

The information is in the table at the end (see screenshot).

In the under-20s, female patients outnumber male. Referral rates for both sexes are similar in the early 20s, then at all ages over 25, male patients outnumber female. Female referral rate for those over 40 is tiny compared to male.

Why do they say ‘gender assigned at birth’? That doesn’t make sense.

No, it doesn't. The person who made the request asked for the data to be broken down by 'natal sex', so I assume that 'gender assigned at birth' is Tavistock speak for natal sex, but who knows? And why are there so many patients whose actual sex is 'unknown' by the medical facility treating them? I would have thought for a gender clinic a patient's actual sex is quite important, otherwise how would they know which treatments to give them? (That obviously applies to most other medical treatments as well.)

That is frustrating. I've come to the point where I find it very instructive to see what is reported and then deleted.

Natal sex, or, to give it the accurate name, sex.

Excellent point.

Another excellent point.

Sigh. This was supposed to quoted in my first post above. It is an excellent point.