Being gay was classified as a mental illness before it was declassified. And, beyond that, people mistake "Gender Dysphoria" as the same as "being transgender", but the former refers to a specific experience and the latter is an affirmed state of living. It would be like saying that the treatment for depression is to live as a depressed person.



Your position is anti-scientific. Your process is as-follows:

Does this research support my opinion? It is good research.
Does this research counter my opinion? It is biased and the result of the woke agenda politicizing science.

You have a cart before the horse approach to this topic.

They're made on such a hunch, with so little research and incomplete studies and lack of evidence that the WHO just issued their guidance last week that explicitly states that surgical or hormonal interventions for gender conditions in children is not recommended on the basis of lack of evidence of efficacy. Thankfully the whole world doesn't share the mengele fervor of coastal liberal Americans to cut first and ask questions later. Particularly damning when the long term studies that do exist and cover unambiguous non-socially derived outcomes like suicide rates, wind up showing either no provable outcome correlation or negative outcomes. But hey, if the academics in sociology departments weren't so touchy about their bogus research they wouldn't need such vitriol to attack and deride the children who do survive these experiments and speak out about detransitioning.

At this point, I have no interest in quibbling with someone whose thought process is:

Research that agrees with me is good, and research that disagrees is bad. There is no permeating the rigidity of that thought process.

And here's why y'all grate me so much with this. You want to only cite specific parts of these examples that support your foregone conclusions, but denounce the rest of it. From your very example:



I will bet 100% that you disagree with that quote from the very example you are citing. So what's the tea, Black? Are you wanting me to regard these papers as serious, or just the parts that you want to hold tightly?

This post was edited by Handcuffs on Feb 13 2024 03:43pm

You know what is scientific above all? Looking for dynamics of a system and having a deep skepticism of any argument premised in statistics, and reject it entirely if its not premised in causality. Science does not give equal footing to evidence that furthers your point and evidence that doesn't, science is premised in the null hypothesis and if I see studies that show no correlative benefit in psychiatric visits, prescriptions, hospitalizations or suicide attempts in transgender children after surgical intervention in a sizeable cohort- only after the original findings are magically corrected when first using a bogus methodology to claim it showed positive outcomes- I don't need to run it through a political filter. The body of research doesn't show an overwhelming and provable trend, ergo I can simply disregard it all as null. When people do isolate provable causal relationships, studies to prove it are generally just a formality, not fishing in the dark and p-hacking until you come up with some bullshit to support a premise.

If you believe there's a global conspiracy of infiltration in the sciences in order to corrupt the research around gender-related care, then there's nothing that I or anyone else can do to shake that perspective. It's just "common sense", as you say. Take care out there, Goom, I hope you find peace as history and this field moves forward in ways I'm sure you will continue to take umbrage with.

This post was edited by Handcuffs on Feb 13 2024 03:50pm

Oh, so now that I have provided you with the evidence you were asking for, now that I have backed my shit up, I'm suddenly an asshole and the bad guy? Pathetic.

Side note: to claim (without evidence) that the elevated rates of mental issues among TG individuals are because of "assholes like myself", i.e. because of discrimination by their social environment, is the exact kind of "massive leap" that you scolded me for less than three hours ago.



I obviously cannot speak for others in this thread, but just to spell out my own position very clearly: I do not hate the very existence of transgender individuals. But I reject most (not: all) of the demands of the trans movement. I reject these demands due to their illiberal nature; because trans activists try to force the rest of society to affirm their delusions, police and control my speech and afford protections and privileges (e.g. for women) based on factually wrong premises.



---------------


Improved functioning doesn't imply that the higher rate of mental health issues among TG goes away completely. Besides, I'm not categorically opposed to social transitioning in childhood, I just want really high standards to be met before doing so; to make sure that it's not just an episode, not just a temporary state of confusedness.

Regarding medical therapy during childhood: I'm out on that one, sorry. Surgically changing one's body or messing with the hormonal balance of an adolescent who's not fully grown up yet is a step too far. We're talking about irreversible changes, in some cases in children who haven't even hit puberty yet.

This post was edited by Black XistenZ on Feb 13 2024 03:56pm

If it were a global conspiracy it would have cucked the WHO already. Pretty sure we're talking about a poison of western culture, nobody in japan shares this delusion

This post was edited by Goomshill on Feb 13 2024 03:58pm

My point is that you'll find in virtually all studies that the increased rates of adverse experiences are due largely to lack of familial acceptance, lack of access to gender affirming care, etc. Consequently, gender-affirming care is the most efficacious approach we've had to-date.

So, I find you irritating because you want to wield these elevated rates of adverse experiences as a bludgeon but then completely ignore or seek to prevent the most efficacious treatment available.

Its funny how the argument for efficacy is in spite of the dearth of research showing otherwise, the consistency in studies that despite hacking away for spurious correlations and trying to arbitrarily control uncontrollable variables, keep showing no provable improvement in outcomes. And even though common sense and basic human biology dictates the extreme harms posed by surgical and hormonal interventions and the most basic ass concept of Primum non nocere that has existed in medicine for multiple millenia, you can say its still the most effective treatment. Probably. Maybe. Hey its an experiment, who knows. Possibly. Within imagination. Well shucks kid hope your dick grows back