WPATH SOC8 now published- Eunuch chapter retained...

[rogdmum]

The final version of SOC8 is out and amongst other things, the chapter on eunuchs has been retained (chapter 9). Surely the NHS must completely distance themselves from WPATH (particularly looking at you, NHS Scotland)

www.tandfonline.com/doi/pdf/10.1080/26895269.2022.2100644

Susie Green and Mermaids are cited. Funny that Mermaids said the Cass Review was not their field just this week in court, but WPATH would appear to be.

Questioning parents are treated with great suspicion, including (when referring to hormones and surgery for adolescents):

“Helping youth and parent(s)/caregiver(s) work together on important gender care decisions is a primary goal. However, in some cases, parent(s)/ caregiver(s) may be too rejecting of their adoles- cent child and their child’s gender needs to be part of the clinical evaluation process. In these situations, youth may require the engagement of larger systems of advocacy and support to move

forward with the necessary support and care (Dubin et al., 2020).”

(S58)

The minimum ages for treatment have been removed, but I’m not convinced that’s much better as will allow providers room to lower and lower the age for the medical pathway.

ImNotAnExpert

Guess so.

I found the page. WPATH are still saying this:

”This version of the Standards of Care is the first to be developed using an evidence-based approach.”

www.wpath.org/soc8/history

So what were they basing it on previously? Wind speed? Cookery books?

Comment on the eunuch chapter found on the trans surgeries Reddit sub:

www.theguardian.com/education/2008/apr/01/research.highereducation1

The minimum age for PBs is covered by the Telegraph

www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2022/09/16/trans-children-young-nine-can-prescribed-sex-change-hormones/

It includes this:

"The latest WPATH guidance was written by a committee which included Susie Green, chief executive of the controversial charity Mermaids, who has no known medical experience.
Jon Arcelus, a professor at the University of Nottingham who works as a doctor at the NHS’s Nottingham Centre for Transgender Health, a service for adults, co-chaired the committee.
Whilst noting that there are not many studies on the long-term impact and no clinical cohort studies of those who regret their decision and “detransition” after receiving “irreversible” treatment, they state that some under 18s may "benefit" from some surgery."
WRT to the NHS, it ends:

"An NHS spokesperson said: “An independent review into the development of gender services for children and young people, led by Dr Hilary Cass, is currently underway. The NHS’ service specification for children and young people does not permit surgical interventions until the age of 18 and the NHS will not be changing this position.”"

The article doesn't include reference to the eunuch chapter

Utterly batshit and the involvement of those doctors will be a stain on our profession in future years.

Hopefully the Cass report will put a massive barge pole between WPATH and the redevelopment of services for kids.

Does EPATH ever contradict WPATH? Only it strikes me that WPATH SoC are really written for a commercial marketplace, edging closer and closer to a state where trans surgeries and hormones are more consumer choice that diagnostic outcomes.

Most of Europe has some sort of socialised health care and has thus developed quite separate operating standards for aesthetic surgeons/injectables that sit outside of what we usually mean by (necessary) health care.

if trans surgeries were to be treated as cosmetic (entirely self funded, over 18s only) I’d be a lot more comfortable with it - after all, the average 18 year old will need a couple of years of responsible working in the real world to build up the cash to pay for surgery (or the credit history to get a loan) and the years of working in the normie world will be invaluable as part of the decision making process.

(over 25s would be better but our law says adult at 18 and I don’t see anyway to realistically override that but individual private surgeons could presumably refuse patients who they felt were poor candidates for successful outcome?)

it strikes me that WPATH SoC are really written for a commercial marketplace, edging closer and closer to a state where trans surgeries and hormones are more consumer choice that diagnostic outcomes.

I don’t believe it’s all driven by consumerism, though I agree a consumerism/money driven approach to medicine certainly helps drive it. Theoretically, their approach would be less popular where social medicine is practiced, as treatment is expensive and (when examined objectively) the evidence base is poor. But I believe there’s another factor that is skewing this branch of medicine.

Many of those running WPATH, including the medics, seem also to be patients.
In my view, that is likely to render them unable to view treatment in the objective way most medics can view their patients. If, as I believe, this returns to being viewed as a mental illness with similarities to anorexia, the equivalent would be people with anorexia who are still starving themselves running a medical program for other people with anorexia.

To avoid deletion for using a particular word in relation to WPATH, I re post this piece by Genevieve Gluck / of Reduxx.

How have we come from recognising that castration was a form of extreme sexual a violence and abuse in history to including it in medical guidelines?

They've stamped out adults getting arms removed pdq but allowing children to have genital mutilation is a okay! 👌

genevievegluck.substack.com/p/castrating-children-in-the-service

It's also terrible that I have no idea if I'm allowed to say any of the above on mn 🤷🏻‍♀️

I bet most thought that was an April fool at the time.

Does EPATH ever contradict WPATH?

I'd like to know this

We hear a lot about WPATH but not EPATH. what are their guidelines? How are the countries who are reversing policy viewing and dealing with all this? Are there reviews similar to Cass there?

This isn't going to go away.

Cass is phenomenally important

It could be influenced by commercial interests and it could be influenced by patients - I don't disagree. But it could be being influenced by another group which might be a group that is either intent on causing harm or is indifferent to causing harm, or feels this is experimental science and that harm is secondary to the "value" gained by doing things that almost everyone else would regard as dangerous.

@PriOn1 I think you’re right that it very much matters that so many of those involved are patients (or parents of patients) with an activist agenda. It’s much less a medical advisory or regulatory group or set of a best practice guidelines than an activist manifesto masquerading as such.

It’s scary that it’s treated as if that’s not the case.

Pri0n, you've definitely hit the nail on the head there.

Not just patients. Mothers who are consumed by this and going to all and any lengths. People with non profits who rely on this for income. And the group of people Reduxx have been writing about.

Don't forget there is also a group of men who get off on the idea of castrating children. There are men online who are getting a thrill from convincing children/teens that they are trans and hearing their stories of puberty blockers (chemical castration) and surgeries.

Colin Wright said that the 'thing we aren't talking about but should be' at the end of triggernometry was the amount of non profits who now rely on the concept and reality of 'trans' as many gay rights have been won; eg gay marriage etc.

There are many with skin in the game.

Reduxx and Jenifer Bilek and many others have done some good investigations around follow the money; irrc the Arcus foundation is significant?

These are now older blog posts but significant.

4thwavenow.com/tag/arcus-foundation/ (Michael Biggs 2018)

4thwavenow.com/2016/07/11/follow-the-money-trans-billionaire-makes-new-1-million-grant-to-chicago-pediatric-transition-clinic/
Jennifer Pritzker. Formerly James

whatisawoman.uk/ArcusFoundation/
Arcus foundation and stonewall 2015, written in 2020 Jenifer Bilek

I'm trying to find a more recent bigger piece where it's all been tied together, but all these keep popping up instead!

www.the11thhourblog.com/

Jennifer Bilek has done tonnes on this

There's an article here about one of the authors of the new WPATH guidelines.

reduxx.info/top-academic-behind-fetish-site-hosting-child-sexual-abuse-fantasy-push-to-revise-wpath-guidelines/

A Professor Emeritus at California State University who has given academic talks on “expanding the transgender umbrella” has for over two decades participated in a fetish forum that hosts and produces extreme sadomasochistic written pornography involving the castration and torture of children.

His academic interests advocate for expanding the concept of ‘gender identity’ to include men with sadomasochistic and even pedophilic castration fantasies — something that has now been included as a Male-to-Eunuch identity in the draft Standards of Care for the World Professional Association of Transgender Health (WPATH), an international medical body that sets guidelines including those related to the transitioning of children.

Benjamin Boyce interview 17 Sept 2022:

New Medical Guidelines Promote "Eunuchs" | with Genevieve Gluck

Why does The Telegraph article not mention any of this? It's massive.

Commenters on the article are already calling it child abuse. They're aghast. This fetish link is surely the follow up article.

I cant understand why it isn't already burying WPATH.