Gender surgeon saying the quiet part out loud

[nothingcomestonothing]

Sorry if there's already a thread. A gender surgeon seems to have said some of the bits they don't say out loud, at a WPATH sponsored event, and been recorded doing so:

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-13092239/Top-Canadian-surgeon-unwittingly-reveals-TRUTH-sex-change-ops-unearthed-video-lifts-lid-ill-trained-doctors-dying-appendages-dreaded-complications.html#article-13092239

For elective surgery all one needs to have it is the money, time and ability to consent.

I think the issue here is that it isn't currently informed consent, if the risks are not adequately communicated? It isn't quite true to say that anyone can have any surgery or procedure they like; all countries have guidelines. You can't ask a surgeon to remove your heart because the presence of it distresses you.

Here's a related story, also from the Mail. It's rammed full of lies and misinformation from the Medical Director of University Hospitals Sussex NHS Foundation Trust:

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-13095965/Row-hospitals-say-hormone-filled-milk-trans-women-born-male-just-good-baby-real-thing.html

Drug-induced milk from transgender women who were born male is as good for babies as a mother's breast milk, an NHS Trust has said. A leaked letter from the Medical Director of University Hospitals Sussex NHS Foundation Trust describes both as 'human milk' and says that they are the 'ideal food for infants'.

It defends the controversial practice of 'induced lactation' by means of powerful medication to enable trans women to simulate breastfeeding. It also claims that the term 'human milk' is 'meant to be neutral and is not gender-biased'.

This was done to death and beyond last year, numerous linked articles were posted and the conclusion was that male secretions are thoroughly unfit for purpose, so why is the Medical Director director pushing this dangerous, unsubstantiated rubbish?

And:

Meanwhile, the Trust has refused to reveal how many births in its hospitals have been to trans women, acknowledging only that it is a 'very small number'.

Even that's wrong, because no transw has ever given birth at all, full stop.

Meanwhile, the Trust has refused to reveal how many births in its hospitals have been to trans women, acknowledging only that it is a 'very small number'.

Anyone get the sense that they were getting the information from the medical equivalent of Father Dougal?

"A 'very small number', Dougal?"
"Yes, Ted."
"How small are we talking here?"
"Oh, very, very small."
"Would that very small number by any chance be zero?"
<Shifty expression>
"Remember we talked how things in your head might not be totally real?"
"Yes, Ted."
"Okay, and these transwomen who gave birth are...?"
"In my head, Ted."
"Like...?"
"The talking horse who does the accounts."
"Exactly. Please stop putting things in your head into press releases. It just makes them send the inspectors around. And we can't be having with that. Especially with the accounts."

Anyone get the sense that they were getting the information from the medical equivalent of Father Dougal?

The difference being that Dougal was hapless, rather than malignant.

It's a study of the patients that one particular clinician has treated.

There is a scarcity of data because, as we know from the Tavi scandal, providers of gender-affirming care are generally reluctant to follow patients up - which is telling, given how much surgeons like to boast about successful outcomes.

People consented to lobotomy. They paid for it. It was a surgical procedure to treat various states of mental distress. It many ways it made more sense than surgeries for gender dysphoria; it was a surgical procedure on the brain, where the distress lay. There were even people who did better as a result. But it was still banned because of how ultimately barbaric it was. It is the precedent for society deciding that surgeries such as these on people’s genitals to treat mental distress are unethical and should be banned.

It's no different to those loons who want to chop healthy arms and legs off.

Forgive my ignorance but is a Medical Director an actual clinically-trained person, or is it just a senior management role?

Assuming that Canada is the same at the UK, definitely a doctor.

The therapy isnt allowed to empower the current body feelings though, any therapist will be careful not to challenge or to help the person explore why their misery has manifest itsself in dysmorphia.

Its totally different to the therapy that any other person who hates their body would get and thats wrong. Most of these patients have a history of trauma/MH issues/ASD/sexual abuse or all of those factors. That is never unpicked and concluded that this is the cause of the person feeling physically uncomfortable with their identity and self and that needs work on.

And Im interested in why it isnt considered FGM for women

I say this a lot. Why dont we allow anorexics to have weight loss surgery, weight loss injections, join slimming clubs, affirm their belief that they are fat/ugly/need to eat less

Why dont we affirm that belief and sense of feeling?

Absolutely this, I have worked with a number of patients like this when I worked in psychiatric hospitals. We dont affirm that, we call it a mental disorder and treat it.

Someone's just posted a classic from Sheila Jeffreys in a thread.

https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5010490-article-from-november-2011-eugenics-and-the-practice-of-transgendering-children?

Decades after the sterilisation of the unfit was mostly abandoned, a similar practice is increasingly being carried out on children who are considered to be innately “transgender” because they are disobeying culturally acceptable gender roles.
As happened with eugenic practices of the past, many progressive people including many feminists, feel that transgendering children is a reasonable practice and have not yet begun to criticise it.

https://theconversation.com/eugenics-and-the-practice-of-transgendering-children-3838

There was a surgeon in the UK doing this a little over 20 years ago.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/625680.stm

There's a longer article about the amputation of limbs and its similarity to gender surgery here.

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

Paywalled, but can be viewed on one of the archive sites. I'll post an archive link in a separate post in case it gets hidden or deleted.

Archive link to article.
A New Way to Be Mad

0 is indeed a very small number.

Is this the same as breast milk from a woman who hasn’t given birth? For eg I’ve seen it on instagram, a lesbian couple who both breastfed the baby, second one induced breast milk with stimulation and medication.
I guess I’m wondering whether it’s the male anatomy unfit for producing or the artificial stimulation of milk production without the correct hormones!

Excellent and fundamentally important question.
Any chance a TRA will answer it?

Workhardcryharder · Today 13:20

Is this the same as breast milk from a woman who hasn’t given birth?

Honestly, I don't know but as women's breasts are actually for lactation, I'd speculate that it was much better.

Actual women aren't allowed to use domperidone to stimulate milk supply, not via the NHS anyway, because of the risk of the domperidone to the baby. Only the modern new type of non birthgiving 'women' are allowed to do that.

Not strictly true - some areas do use it with caution, but your general point stands: the baby's welfare is paramount - except if there are some men with hurty feelings.

Does anyone remember the source of the article/commentary that to care about babies being damaged by drugs passed to them by parents who were of TQ+ identities was 'ableist' and we should embrace life long damage to children rather than expect a special group of adults to deal with boundaries to their wishes?

Edited to add: as someone who lives 24/7 with pain, immobility, infections and all that goes with it, if I was told it was caused directly by parental damage knowingly and by choice and I should embrace that because it enabled a parent to do what they wanted with no responsibility (and calling it ableism enables them a bit more in having no responsibility)..... I'd tell them they were insane and the parent in question should have lost their parental rights to social services. No one should have to live all their lives with illness and disability because of parental choice to do it to them.

Does anyone remember the source of the article/commentary that to care about babies being damaged by drugs passed to them by parents who were of TQ+ identities was 'ableist' and we should embrace life long damage to children rather than expect a special group of adults to deal with boundaries to their wishes?

Was it this one? (One of the authors is Sally Hines, so the content is unsurprising.)
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2667321523000811?via%3Dihub

Thread from last year.
https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/4851765-this-is-outrageous-medical-paper-argues-that-wanting-healthy-undeformed-babies-should-be-queered

"The authors argue that “gendered” pregnancy care is too focused on helping women have healthy babies, and that it might be okay for transmen to continue taking testosterone during pregnancy despite the known health risks to the fetus and effects on its normal development. The desire for “normal fetal outcomes,” according to the authors, is rooted in a problematic desire “to protect their offspring from becoming anything other than ‘normal’” and “reflect historical and ongoing social practices for creating ‘ideal’ and normative bodies."

https://www.realityslaststand.com/p/is-there-a-doctor-in-the-house

The phrase 'born in the wrong body' has such a lot to answer for😟

'Biological reality' isn't an irrelevant optional extra. It's a source of great anguish to many people - great enough to drive us to seek out drastic surgical routes toward addressing our physical dysphoria despite knowing they have a significant chance of complications.

Then wouldn't it be better if the dysphoria was addressed mentally, rather than physically?