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?

I am sorry for your bad experiences.

Many women also have similar histories, and for exactly that same reason, don't want men in their spaces.

The vast majority of women polled don't want to share women-only spaces with men, including men who think they are women, pretend to be women, or identify as women.

Women often won't or can't openly share their wishes for male-free spaces. The reasons are a mixture of fear or repercussions, and a socialised desire to 'be kind'.

This is an anonymous internet board, so women are able to speak more freely.

I see. ‘You lot’ is dehumanising in nature. hardly respectful. Nor is ‘losing (your) shit’ at people who disagree with you.

The poster in question has been deleted numerous times for personal attack so perhaps that is why that poster doesn’t ‘lose his shit’ here however, it is questionable about whether or not the poster doesn’t insult others.

Ahhhh context matters.
still applaud keeping their temper.
haha well it was meant affectionately. Love arguing with some of you. Others not so much

He also behaves dismissively about the long term impacts on female people getting these treatments as children or young adults.

The very first patient in the Dutch cohort, a female, patient B, spoke of her distress and discomfort with her genitals. It wouldn’t surprise me to find that the reason the Finnish cohort still require mental health appointments is to deal with their distress from the effects of testosterone.

Many of us are also seriously concerned.

The poster you have praised doesn’t seem to share that degree of concern when he has been asked to explain further though. I think after weeks of discussion with the poster, it is more accurate to say that as a supporter of those treatments, they are more likely concerned that treatment might be shown to be harmful to those adolescents and withdrawn.

The only one I saw being proposed in their model in this thread was as puberty blockers. Which is problematic as we don’t know the impact. I had an ED in my youth. My body was frozen from malnutrition and it never recovered. Ergo I don’t agree with every argument made.
i saw hormones being offered to over 21s and I do have issues with blocking that treatment to anyone as I’m going to be menopausal within the next ten or so years and I want access to those drugs without stupid hoops.
so I’m heavily invested in both sides and interested in the science.
i don’t have context I just have this thread and they came across very well in this one. Clearly learning from mistakes

Yes, but he's on @22ztr 's side!

I remember. And I remember reading her updates.

The constant dismissal of those negative impacts on female people by male people who find those impacts inconvenient to their political aims is very slowly being reduced. The detransitioners submissions to committees and panels is slowly increasing the width of awareness.

i don’t know if they are. They just thanked me for thanking them for their opinions. Let’s see their reaction to my thoughts on puberty blockers

No, that is not what peer review means. It is review by others who are of equal standing and expertise in the field.

Undergraduate level reading is not this.

Right but same skills. Hence I said ‘like a peer’ not ‘as a peer’.
can we not get into another argument about my word choices? At whatever level of academia you’re at, you’re encouraged to use these skills when you use papers.

Not sure that they are to be fair. Considering how many posters we have at the moment complaining that others on FWR disagree with them or use language that they don’t like to see, it is not an automatic assumption that the poster is on anyone’s side.

Besides, lots of us all have different opinions about aspects of the issue as we, thankfully, are not a hive mind. Of course, can work together really well to achieve things which is fucking awesome.

Well, onepost has made a lot of posts. I suppose they are informative in a sense. So long as one bears in mind the contradictions and startling assertions.

Also worth noting the dynamic. This entire thread was supposed.to be about young people, but ends up being about onepost's personal stories and claims.

Maybe your word choices led to pushback from people before causing you to ‘lose your shit’, in whatever way you meant, previously.

The reason it's become all about onepost is because an awful lot of posters have latched onto his posts and have been asking questions or demanding he answer them on certain points.

If the reaction had been "that's interesting but we'll have to agree to disagree" and moving on, I doubt the thread would have gone the way it has.

I think there is also much wider context to be had what any treatment then means for the purpose of female single sex provision.

At what point will the much needed mental health care ensure that a person who has the treatment still is able to function in society without demanding that society treats them as if they have changed sex. Meaning that male people understand that they are still male people and make sure their choices don’t negatively impact on female people.

What has been remarkable is talking to female people who have undergone treatment a very long time ago who still seek to find equitable alternative solutions for their needs when it comes to single sex provision. There are some male
people who say they do it too, yet when they are asked specifically, admit that they will still use female toilets.

Either way, context of people’s reactions is rather important. If you lack the context for the reaction on threads, perhaps ask for clarification.

Can I ask if you characterise that it is respectful to female people to dismiss what they are saying about their own experiences and needs when you are a male person who cannot acknowledge that he is a male person? or even transgender?

Or is it just the lack of what you perceive as insults that you have characterised as ‘respectful’?

There are a few ways to view ‘respect’ on this thread so it would be good to have clarity about what you consider ‘respectful’.

I find it really hard. I wouldn’t expect a Christian to back down and say ok Jesus isn’t real. I won’t pray in your country. I’ll constantly pretend my beliefs aren’t real and agree to yours to protect your feelings. Idk where I sit with this one

22ztr

Do you realise that every time onepost uses the term ‘sex realist’ he is doing so with the intention of insulting people? He has been very up front about that from when he started doing it.

Do you think it is respectful in a discussion to dismiss materially real and proven facts of science as belief? Is it respectful to characterise those who understand and believe those facts about human sex categorisation, that have not been disproven, to be effectively believers of cult like thinking and extremists?

I don’t consider that respectful at all. It is a form of gaslighting.

I don’t know what that term is or why it’s disrespectful.

they are entitled to their beliefs about gender as much as you are entitled to yours. Whether they can legally act on them - or should be able to - is the bit that’s important to me

You seem to be both conflating scientific fact as religion and acknowledging that the belief that people can change sex is akin to religious belief based on faith and with no historical proof supporting it.

Do some people believe that Jesus is a real entity? That is unprovable.

Do you believe that humans can change sex? That is provable and definable and even logic can answer that. No. They cannot.

If you make your decisions on whether or not someone’s feelings should be protected, that is your choice. However, when that protection of feelings causes direct harm, other people have the right to choose differently.

What person has the right to expect anyone else has to act as if their philosophical belief is material reality when it is not and probably not material reality?

It is a term being used to be disrespectful.

Again, perhaps you have missed a great deal of context.

”they are entitled to their beliefs about gender as much as you are entitled to yours.”

Gender? Sure. Sex? Sex categories for humans is based in science and until science changes on what is understood about human sex classification, it is not really a ‘belief’ in the same way. People can choose to not believe the established understanding of that science but that doesn’t mean it is a belief in the same way as religion.

“Whether they can legally act on them - or should be able to - is the bit that’s important to me”

And to many of us. And onepost has confirmed many times that he will continue to access female single sex provisions as a male person.

to add: and in law, sex is defined now in the UK and in other countries and for international regulation. That definition in UK law has been clarified, it is not belief.

Look your trying to pull me into a semantics arguement again. I agree on single sex spaces. You are preaching to the choir. Why not tell me your thoughts on restricting access to hormones because that will impact me. I want all the drugs to go through menopause and I want drs happy and confident prescribing them. If tras get me that by shouting loudly fab.

Onepost can believe whatever he chooses to. What he can’t do is force his beliefs on others.

I’ve 3 children under 6 years old and it is my responsibility as their mother to protect them from being indoctrinated into a belief that they can ‘pick and choose’ their sex.

They can’t. No one can. People that insist they have, are liars.
Anyone that thinks they have a right to lie to children is not someone that I find respectful.

How tf do you think TRAs shouting will get you HRT?