Is there ANY concern among Trans Rights Activists for the health wellbeing of adolescents receiving gender affirming drugs that the findings of the Finnish study might be true

[mardirousse]

You would expect Trans Rights Activists to be concerned about the physical mental health of gender questioning children, yet I haven't seen a single TRA express the slightest concern that gender affirming care might be causing harm to young kids, who they see as transgender. Not here, not on r/transgenderuk, not on x.
They are attacking the credibility of the study, but given its size and the very shocking findings, why aren't at least some of them expressing a little concern that there might be something in it? I mean, these are vulnerable kids, and they're taking really powerful drugs with major long-term consequences, and now it looks like there's evidence that it may be doing the opposite of what it's supposed to...
How could you not be concerned, whatever your agenda? They're kids!
Aren't trans rights activists interested in the right of trans kids to be safe and healthy?
Am I missing something?

That is your belief.

Intersectionality in this particular case, isn't intersectional but male dominance over women.

But you do. You said the HRT gave you a female puberty even though you’re male.

Also it's not HRT if it's not replacing something that was previously there. It's additional drugs.

But I don't. I was responding to a general statement (by the use of the word 'can').

"With respect, you think taking pills can change your sex."

All the secondary sex characteristics I have were developed during puberty. They are observably female.

Still not a female puberty, just drug induced chest enlargement.

More development than breasts. Also, no male development.

They are observably female.

They're not observably female if they're not part of a female body.

That would be the sex realist belief.

It's a sex realist fact

which, is very much a belief.

No, you are wrong.

But repeating "belief" is really all you've got. Because there are not real arguments there.

If your penis fell off, that's worrying. If you had it removed as a teenager, that's even more worrying, although less funny.

If I gave a male mouse estrogen would it suddenly become female? Because I suspect no reputable scientist would be dumb enough to say this.

I don't know where a penis entered this discussion, but it can be funny.

Look, you can't call 'realism' a belief. It's more of an approach.

'No male development'. Conveniently forgets the bit where a little boy was born with and grew a penis until he decided to have it inverted.

my life is what i've got. Sex realist beliefs fail to encompass reality..

I never grew a penis. Before or after chopping.

Well I don't know what other secondary sex characteristics you were talking about then. Vanishing balls?

We were discussing secondary sex development.

Realism means being realistic, referring to reality, and considering the real world.

Saying realism fails to encompass your beliefs says far more about your beliefs than about realism.

The only women who have grown penises, have been mothers of sons.

Male pubertal sex development ideally involves the penis and testes. No vanishing that I was aware of, though.

I don't believe in sex realist beliefs. You got me.