So disgusted tonight

[Mollyollydolly]

Owen Jones and Pink News tweeted about the two Helens, Joyce and Staniland and their YouTube chat .. Jones taking what they said completely out of context it's resulted in some of the most vile abuse aimed at Helen Joyce in particular on twitter tonight. So many death threats.

I wish there was something we could do, it's so utterly vile, it's time they were held to account for their lies. It's really upsetting.

Owen Jones isn't fit to lace Helen's shoes, I cant believe The Guardian still employ him. I've seen threats to murder, throw napalm in their faces from Joss Prior and many many more. It's disgusting and all down to Owen.

How can this stand up to any level of journalistic ethics or integrity.

It's time we did something, some kind of collective action.

What worries me is the way that older males are so keen for young people to transition, and they obviously see that there is something in it for themselves. Why would they think the idea of children and teenagers who seem younger than they are due to pbs is such a good thing? Why are they using young peoples distress and confusion to validate their own choices. Why is this dysphoria so much more special than the old and unfashionable psychiatric dysphorias that make some people believe they are someone famous, for example? We can be sympathetic to their problem but not affirm that they are right. While I suppose that people as adults have the right to change their bodies , I would always try to talk about why they feel they have a need for eg cosmetic surgery. And as long as women are not allowed to choose to be sterilised and have to wait a long time for reconstructive surgery after devastating injuries, than this kind of alteration should be done at the persons own cost. And after the age of 25. And of course receive the type of counselling/ care that might change minds. With reminders that you can never be the opposite sex ,nor identify into the opposite sex.

‘But I categorically do not want to eliminate trans people from society.’

I don’t, but I do think some people have adopted a belief in a state for which there is very little evidence, and so some people are transitioning physically when actually psychological support would help them reconcile themselves with their sexualities or their physical bodies, or help resolve the dysphoria. You (not you in particular) can see that as ‘eliminationist’ or you can unstop your ears and see that it’s a different conception of how to help people who are suffering.

‘surley by making these "every one of those people" statements she actually IS saying, or at least strongly implying that she sees them as "a coherent and innate class of people". If he doesn't think that then why is she saying this stuff?’

I think we mean slightly different things here. Obviously there is a coherent class of people who call themselves ‘trans’. But that could also be true of people who call themselves anything. They also have some (perhaps just one) shared characteristic, and that is something they call a ‘gender identity’ that is different to their sex. But what HJ seems not to accept (and she may be right) is that there is any innate or stable set of attributes that gives rise to this identification. To her (I think) it’s a label people use who have many fundamentally different experiences or attributes, and hence (despite the name) they may not represent one coherent class of people.

But how can that happen without doctors being involved? Having doctors give patients harmful treatments is really not good.

‘But how can that happen without doctors being involved? Having doctors give patients harmful treatments is really not good.’

I agree, but the research isn’t there yet to demonstrate whether it does do harm that negates any perceived benefit.

Violent threats is all they've got.

Imagine if she was saying that about disabled people for example, who also tend to cost the NHS a great deal of money and need special treatment in society.

The equivalent is let's try and reduce the number of disabled people in society, by finding a cure for whichever disability they have.

Not stigmatise them for being disabled and eliminate them!

I don’t think we can (or should) try to stop adults transitioning if that is what they want to do. They’re not doing any harm to others by what they choose to do to their bodies.

But they don't stop at doing things to their own bodies. They want the rest of the world to engage with their version of reality. That's where the wider harm to others happens.

And I'm not convinced that adults are or should be allowed to do anything they want even to their own bodies. That's why we intervene in suicide attempts and self-harm. That's why we have safety measures and safety rules in sports. That's why you cannot buy more than 2 packets of ibuprofen at one time.

‘The equivalent is let's try and reduce the number of disabled people in society, by finding a cure for whichever disability they have.’

Thing is, you can only ever offer a cure. If someone believes there is no medical problem and they prefer to be as they are, that’s not up to us.

Yes, of course I agree with the points you make, completely. But that's not what she was saying.

The message of the "every one of those people" quotes was that ALL trans people are problematic. They are ALL "a huge problem to a sane world". That is what she said. She wasn't differentiating in any way between young lesbians under severe social pressure, children who are given medical treatment to transition, trans extremists who are undemining the whole concept of sex and influencing almost all of our institutions, or the great majority of adult trans individuals who just want to quietly get on with their lives (very often without and medical intervention). Mostly they accept the sex they were born with and have no desire to undermine women's rights. They feel the trans activists are setting their cause back decades. I have a very close family member who is trans and conforms to the last grouping. I've discussed this with her at length, so I have a fair idea what I'm talking about.

And nobody here was calling her out on it. So a reasonable assumption is that people here agree with her.

"every one of those people is basically you know a huge problem to a sane world". That statement is not OK, in my view, and if the view of the posters here is that it's acceeptable then I guess this isn't the place for me.

If we are just talking about people from their own choice, not medical necessity, deciding to live as the other sex, then it is clearly not a medically necessary treatment. And it is risky no matter how you slice it.

Normally medical ethics does not look at this kind of thing lightly. The huge increase in cosmetic procedures has really blurred the lines here, but really it shouldn't have. Feeling better about your nose or lips or whatever doesn't outweigh the risks in a way that is really in line with proper medical practice.

If society wants to train up a bunch of cosmetic surgeons who work commercially they should be up front about it, it has nothing to do with medical practice and shouldn't be funed in any way through public money. And they shouldn't be subject to the same limits as doctors.

‘But they don't stop at doing things to their own bodies. They want the rest of the world to engage with their version of reality. That's where the wider harm to others happens.’

I agree entirely that this is harmful. I also think it’s separable (or should be separable, if people behaved more sensibly) from the core issue.

‘And I'm not convinced that adults are or should be allowed to do anything they want even to their own bodies. That's why we intervene in suicide attempts and self-harm. That's why we have safety measures and safety rules in sports. That's why you cannot buy more than 2 packets of ibuprofen at one time.’

Huge ethical questions here. Where we draw the line on some of them is contested, and I don’t think situations can be equated quite so neatly as this.

MangyInseam

Again, big and difficult questions. Is it a medical condition, or set of conditions? If it is, is it treatable (can be alleviated or prevented or ‘cured’) through therapeutic methods? If it isn’t, is the current approach better any way?

I don’t know. Time will tell.

Ah, OK. So do you believe that trans people have a medical problem - maybe a mental disorder? That a cure is possible?

Genuine questions, I would like to know. If you do think that, is it a common belief here?

Also, I guess there is quite a good analogy here in regard to disabled people. Of course finding a cure for a treatable disability is nothing but laudable. But there is no cure for, e.g. Down's syndrome. You wouldn't put trans people in that category then, presumably?

‘Ah, OK. So do you believe that trans people have a medical problem - maybe a mental disorder? That a cure is possible?’

I couldn’t say. I suspect there’s a psychological component to it. But to what extent that’s disorderly I don’t know. Same for whether it can be ‘cured’. No idea.

‘But there is no cure for, e.g. Down's syndrome. You wouldn't put trans people in that category then, presumably?’

Well, obviously not, no. That’s a chromosomal variation, isn’t it? But again, to what extent should we regard it as something to be corrected? They’re difficult questions.

People do not always speak as precisly in a conversation as in writing. Almost no one does, and I don't think it's reasonable to tear apart sentences in isolation from the rest of a discussion.

The fact is there is zero evidence there is some kind of innate trans person. Body dysphoria is a medical, mental health problem. Having to go in for body modification to alleviate it is a poor outcome.

Even just talking about something like wearing certain clothes - this is also not great. A healthy adult may prefer to wear some clothing rather than others, but they are not going to be destabilized by wearing something that doesn't fit with their sense of who they are. That is a sign of a mental health problem. It's why to a large extent in everyday life, most adults don't feel the need to wear clothing or present themselves in a way that is very different than anyone else in their workplace or community or school. They might have preferences, and it can be nice for them to express them to some extent, but almost no one does all the time and people do not find that challenging to their sense of self.

There is something wrong when there is so much emphasis on social presentation in order to validate sense of self.

But when the patient demands to completely control the treatment?

There is no truly equivalent perspective in any other area of medicine is there?

Well it's not necessarily a question of what people believe. It's the difficulty in defining what transgender actually is. Because it seems to be the go to solution to all sorts of disperate problems that are not related.

So let's ask another question, then.

You asked if everyone believes it's a medical problem? As if you don't think that?

My question to you is, what do you believe it is?

Two years ago, the American Journal of Psychiatry published a paper that claimed trans adults were helped by transition. After complaints from readers, the data was reanalysed and a correction had to be made.

https://ajp.psychiatryonline.org/doi/10.1176/appi.ajp.2020.1778correction

the results demonstrated no advantage of surgery in relation to subsequent mood or anxiety disorder-related health care visits or prescriptions or hospitalizations following suicide attempts in that comparison.

Overall, the evidence that medical transition helps anyone - adults or children - is very low. It’s fine to say that for adults they should be free to do whatever they want. But it raises serious ethical questions for medical professionals: can a doctor ethically undertake treatment on a patient, even if that patient is fully consenting, if they know that treatment will not help the patient, and possibly harm them?

The answer should be a difficult one. But we know there are individual doctors who wouldn’t think twice nor pause to question their decision and just crack on. But as a profession and a society, we absolutely need to discuss it. Because doctors are taking people with one condition (both simultaneously a medical condition needing intervention and not a medical condition 🤨) and turning them into people with another condition - a patient for life with doctor-induced disease. It’s remarkable that people like Joss Prior (who started all this) and LOJ et al aren’t mature enough to acknowledge the real harms from medical transition, even if they’re convinced of the benefits. They do real people whose lives are still finding their way a huge disservice.

‘But when the patient demands to completely control the treatment?

There is no truly equivalent perspective in any other area of medicine is there?’

I’m not sure. I suspect not.

‘But it raises serious ethical questions for medical professionals: can a doctor ethically undertake treatment on a patient, even if that patient is fully consenting, if they know that treatment will not help the patient, and possibly harm them?’

I would say not. I think society will move away from these treatments. But the evidence base for that shift will need to be very strong.

The evidence will be non existent if things continue as they are. Nobody would be allowed to run meaningful studies. We have seen far too much interference with academic studies into all aspects of transgenderism.

And nobody here was calling her out on it. So a reasonable assumption is that people here agree with her.

Not true. Some of us did question her wording, including me.

But ... you just said "Thing is, you can only ever offer a cure. If someone believes there is no medical problem and they prefer to be as they are (implying they have a choice in the matter), that’s not up to us."

Sorry, I don't understand what you're saying. It seems to me that you, and probably many others here, DO think there is a medical problem/mental disorder/something that can be "cured", but when you're challenged you backtrack.

This is depressing. I want to be part of a group of people who oppose the extremism that the trans movement has become, but who accept that some people are genuinely trans. That isn't what I'm finding here at the moment.

Do you think that gay people "prefer to be as they are" too?