"I thought gender surgery would make me feel better. I was misled"

[SidewaysOtter]

I've always said that one of the things that would finally do for this ideology was big lawsuits...and here we are:

https://www.thetimes.com/article/60b9377e-aeba-4e02-9244-dc49098eab5a?shareToken=879697222a082259a21ab3ead7c4d33d&ver=article

I do wonder if none of these people undergoing surgery have no learning difficulties ( which they don't seem to as its not mentioned). Then where is their questioning of "what does this organ do and therefore, what happens if I remove it?"

It's like the thought process stops at appearance. "My testicles grow my beard"

But mostly other people do think harder and deeper or do they not? Eg yes remove my appendix it has no purpose and who litigates when chemo makes your hair fall out and your left infertile for example? "I just thought it could cure my cancer, no one told me it was toxic"

I just do not believe that for a second, he asked "tell me every consequence," and they said, "No facial hair mate," or he didn't Google.

It’s not an ideology.
It’s only a few people.
It’s only a minority of detransitioners.
You’re whining.
You’re obsessed.

HOUSE!

Or nowadays, please don't remove my appendix, it supports healthy gut bacteria and protects me from losing them, with all the dire consequences.

This much repeated ‘low regret rate’ is obviously bull though, isn’t it? I’ve seen other people say it has a lower rate of regret than cancer surgery. Do you honestly find that believable? If you do, I have a bridge to sell you. I’ve seen posts online from people who’ve had horrendous complications from SRS, such as fistulas that cause them to leak shit through their faux vaginas, yet they still feel the need to repeat this mantra of no regret. They are lying, and it’s simple to deduce why. Most people who go in for surgery of some kind don’t do so with the added layer of magical thinking that accompanies ‘trans healthcare’, they just hope for the best and sometimes that best doesn’t happen. There’s no weird baggage attached to, say, hip replacements, so those who have issues don’t feel any compunction to lie about it for the comfort of others.
For a long time now there’s been a very dark denial of reality that’s been allowed to fester at the heart of the trans movement which has encouraged unrealistic expectations and wishful thinking to flourish. If I had to pin the blame anywhere I’d say from observation that it’s a combination of many things; social media, the money focussed American medical industry, the takeover by middle class white men who would have previously just been transvestites, and people with very suspicious motivations at the likes of WPATH (eunuch gender?!).
It’s not sustainable as it currently stands, it’s a house of cards. The sad thing is that if cooler heads had prevailed 15-20 years ago it wouldn’t be the bizarre mess it is currently and trans people would be in a far better position now. It’s easy to blame transphobia for the current backlash, ignoring that that to those looking in from the outside it has the appearance of a total shit-show that true believers have studiously ignored for the best part of two decades because it was a cracking pity-party that anyone could join.

It could be argued that telling people of the side-effects of surgery could be considered conversion therapy and therefore soon be illegal..

leaving some commercial interests very motivated to push the legislation through asap

Clearly these pesky women must be silenced otherwise they will carry on with their sunlight-drenched court cases and awkward reasserting of reality

Stark denial of reality is at the heart of transgenderism. It is fundamental to transgenderism. It has always been so.

Old-school transexuals recognised that they could not change sex, just their appearance. They recognised that the way the rest of society interacted with them was a response to the way they presented themselves and the way they behaved. They recognised that their surgeries did not change society.

Old-school cross-dressing men recognised that they did not change sex when they put on feminine-coded clothes. They recognised that their behaviour was purely about their own pleasure. Some, no doubt, denied that other people’s negative reactions enhance their own pleasure, but most recognised this, too.

Neither of these were transgenderism. It became transgenderism when these men began to insist that society join in with their fantasies, when their fantasies were given more weight than reality.

All I know about this young man is what I read in the article, but he does not strike me as belonging to either of those groups. He seems more like a pre-teen/teen struggling with the realities of puberty, or like a young gay man struggling with internalised homophobia, or who hasn’t yet understood that he is gay. He is another casualty of the stark denial of reality resulting from other men’s fantasies being given more weight than reality.

How can transitioning have a lower regret rate than cancer surgery? Says who? Cancer if left un treated in the majority of cases will eventually kill you. No one died naturally of feeling their genital wasn't pleasing.

Or is specifically male cancers that exfect sex like prostrate cancer? Is that the difference?
Man - prostrate cancer will kill me but to get prostrate removed = no errection so let me die.

woman - i have the BRAC gene and breast cancer. Cut them off let me live.

so it's about bio woman and bio mans view of value of life v importance of sexual organs? Is that the stats?

Genuinely don't understand. But I'm not defined by genitals or use it as my entire identity. Neither is shagging so I can't comment. I do find some of the thought process baffling. Like, I didn't know if I had no testicles I couldn't get a errection. I'd rather have my balls chopped off than do a five minute Google search then litigate. To me that's nuts. No pun intended.

I'm sure it will be so argued, if it isn't already.

What? Wait. Really? Huh??? How? Seriously. How?

You don't need to understand biology to have an inkling that when a part is gone, you won't have the use of that part. No arms? Can't play basketball. No breasts? Can't breastfeed.

Has she explained her thought process at all? Or was she just somehow completely unencumbered by it? Meaning, the thought process.

(I realize this is tangential to the topic, but my brain is shortcircuiting. I'll be losing sleep over this!)

I can kinda see it, especially if she had the kind of mastectomy that is done around the nipple, so the nipple is not cut and pasted back on. So she might have thought that as long as she had functional nipples, she could breastfeed? A bit like believing that if you have a faucet sticking out of a wall, you can get water, without realising that the faucet needs to be attached to the rest of the plumbing in the wall.

It's a nightmare that a raging transactivist like Freddie McConnell, who was, if I remember, also a journalist, doesn't understand the bloody surgery, though.

If you're going promote an ideology to the point of trying to pretend you're the father of your own children, at least understand the implications of it.

I see what you mean, but I would argue that being a raging activist (for any cause) makes you in fact less likely to research the facts and accept them. The more raging you are, the more convinced you are that you already know the truth - so what do you need research for?

Also, if you're going to argue that these surgeries are reversible, as some TRAs do, then you have a vested interest in not knowing the very inconvenient truth that they are absolutely not.

I suspect there's an element of sticking your fingers in your ears and "LA LA LA I CAN'T HEAR YOU" but also that trans rights activism is shot through with the idea that anything other than complete affirmation is transphobia, hatred and possibly fascism.

It's a feature, not a bug. Trans ideology is completely illogical and irrational, so TRAs mustn't be dragged into anything resembling an actual discussion. The only way to do that without looking like the cowards they are, is to argue that the people on the other side are SO evil, that even entertaining them for a minute would be committing a moral evil.

Well that falls into conspiracy theorists type of logic.

The earth is flat. So how does the moon. Pull the tudes? Easier to belive there's a giant man made wave machine since pre industrial age than the earth isn't flat and moon is also flat and perfectly angled to appear as a disk ( but whom? The man?).

This is a lack of critical thinking and inability to check your facts. A common trait in our species.

Lots of humans hate science. Yet they think there's something greater than our knowledge of science to pull tides. Fascinating really.why does breast tissue lactate? Science? Or pure will?

Re your point regarding sex negation: Texas Children's Hospital was investigated for fraud in treating children with gender-related issues. As part of the resolution process, the hospital has to pay a fine; set up and staff a clinic for detransitioners; maintain correct, non-fraudulent patient records; and recognise that what they call gender-affirming care is sex-rejecting procedures.

https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/justice-department-secures-landmark-resolution-end-pediatric-gender-affirming-care-and

https://www.kxan.com/news/texas/settlement-between-texas-childrens-hospital-state-details-nations-first-detransition-clinic/

The people who believe trans surgery has a low regret rate are the same people who can read a biography of an adult trans person's life, read their experiences of sexism, homophobia and abuse, and get to the end believing it is right the trans person felt they had to have life altering surgery/ hormones.

It's a very.....I dunno.... Un- curious stance? Very individualistic. Not radical. Very un- questioning of who and what powers drive Western culture.

It's another reason why it's so very sad when young people believe this sexist , homophobic ideology, when historically they have had the passion to want to change society (or perhaps just the time and lack of caring responsibilities!)

glad to hear it.

I hear what you're saying, and you would understand the mindset better. But Freddie McConnell was a journalist for years. I've just googled it. Worked for the guardian as a proper employee, not just someone who wrote the occasional article. Years and years.

you think someone at that level would understand basic biology.

It's very worrying that they didn't.

Not surgery related but I started a thread some time ago about a transman joining a walking group and not being actively welcomed, which sparked some interesting discussions that parallel those in this one.

Trans people can end up far more isolated than they felt before transitioning. If not for medical reasons, because they no longer fit anywhere socially. It is sad.

I believe you should take responsibility for your own actions. No one held this person at gunpoint and made them have the surgery.

https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5281525-transman-tries-to-join-female-and-non-binary-space

I am not trying to plug my thread, more so thinking the replies may be of interest to those interested in these conversations if they haven't already read it.

There is a link between autism ant trans identifying people of course, a belief that fixing one's body will fix one's mind, rather than starting with the mind.

I do feel sad for the individuals, society has or should have responsibility toward people with these complex mental health issues.

This is pretty interesting, in particular in relation to Freddie O’Connell. I thought it was worth quoting at length.

“Although her surgeon did not discuss breastfeeding, Elizabeth believed that if he had she would not have welcomed the conversation, “I don't think I would have been receptive, I would have felt insulted and I would have said it was triggering my gender dysphoria.” However, Elizabeth explains that this response would have been an avoidance tactic, “That wouldn't really have been true. It would have been because…maybe I did want children… but it's like this trump card, gender dysphoria, meaning you can't have any conversation.” That is, mention of gender dysphoria stops health professionals from further exploration. She explains, “I was conflicted about[possible future motherhood]… because part of me actually did want children. I was very confused about, could I be an OK mother? Or would I be a bad mother? And so to me, rather than having to deal with those questions, the easiest thing was to make it impossible… take the choice away.””

www.frontiersin.org/journals/global-womens-health/articles/10.3389/fgwh.2023.1073053/full