Gender again. Sorry!

[monkers]

You've told us there's no diagnosis for being trans, it's just 'I say I am'. Yet this is a state that also requires being a lifelong medical patient and in some double maestectomies and castration. Odd for something that isn't a health issue.

Plenty of scientist still think sex is binary. Plenty of scientists and doctors are urging caution in respect of medicalising children - including the pioneers of the affirmative model in Holland. The ones who are still full steam ahead are the ones in the US who make mega bucks from 14 year old girls getting double maestectomies, and hundreds of dollars a month from prescriptions, or who have built a career as transactivists.

Am I the one doing emotional pleading? Or am I the one telling you what the World Health Organisation says?

You disagree with them. One of you is wrong. What are the odds of you being the correct one?

The WHO's argument has hence far been cogent, your's has not. It's a big ask to expect folk to agree with you, the enthusiastic amateur. Having other enthusiastic amateurs with you does not elevate that status too much - it's like you buying 10 euro lottery tickets and believing that make you the winner because I only bought one. The almost inevitable is that you will lose ten times more heavily.

 

[monkers]

You've told us there's no diagnosis for being trans, it's just 'I say I am'. Yet this is a state that also requires being a lifelong medical patient and in some double maestectomies and castration. Odd for something that isn't a health issue.

Plenty of scientist still think sex is binary. Plenty of scientists and doctors are urging caution in respect of medicalising children - including the pioneers of the affirmative model in Holland. The ones who are still full steam ahead are the ones in the US who make mega bucks from 14 year old girls getting double maestectomies, and hundreds of dollars a month from prescriptions, or who have built a career as transactivists.

I haven't. I told you there is no diagnostic test - Vulcan mind melding is not yet a thing. Clinicians make a diagnosis on the basis of the person consistently stating their gender identity over a period of time - effectively a two year cooling off period in the UK.

The medications are not to block gender identity, there are no GI blocking drugs to my knowledge. The medications alter the chemistry of the body. In the case of trans women, testosterone is reduced to such an extent that atrophy kicks in which has the effect of reducing testosterone further and thereby further increasing atrophy as an ongoing and continuing process. Libido is also affected.

This is very problematic in the UK system because trans healthcare is so inadequate. Those who wish to proceed to surgery are blocked by the queues lasting for years. The effect of being left to wither on the vine is that by the time they system has progressed them to surgery, often something like five or maybe seven years, the extent of the atrophy is such that there remains insufficient donor material for surgery.

This is a human tragedy story. Your take on it though is rather different from the truth. Indeed not, your take is to insist that trans women are choosing not to have surgery, as if to say they are not committed enough. That's nasty, cruel even.

Reproductive potential in mammals is binary, but only if you decide that it's the correct scientific approach to ignore those people who do not have that potential from being included within the framework of humanity. In other words, claiming that sex is binary on the basis of gametes and the ability to deliver them, is a dehumanising process for some people, not limited to, but including trans people.

 

[AuroraSaab]

The WHO's argument has hence far been cogent, your's has not. It's a big ask to expect folk to agree with you, the enthusiastic amateur. Having other enthusiastic amateurs with you does not elevate that status too much.

Doctors and researchers for governments in the UK, Sweden, Finland, France, Netherlands.... all putting the brakes on or reviewing puberty blockers. Ireland and NZ now too.

Sports scientists, medics, sporting bodies .... all protecting the Women's category in sports.

Happy to be on the same side as these 'enthusiastic amateurs' rather than the 'experts' lining their pockets making life long medical patients of people.

 

[AuroraSaab]

In other words, claiming that sex is binary on the basis of gametes and the ability to deliver them, is a dehumanising process for some people, not limited to, but including trans people.

It's not based on the ability to deliver them. It's based on reproductive pathways; of which there are only 2 in all mammals, whether they work correctly in individuals or not. If the entire population of the world became infertile overnight, there would still only be 2 sexes.

 

[monkers]

Doctors and researchers for governments in the UK, Sweden, Finland, France, Netherlands.... all putting the brakes on or reviewing puberty blockers. Ireland and NZ now too.

None of which decrees that gender identity can not exist, which is what we were talking about, and is your amateur opinion.

 

[monkers]

Sports scientists, medics, sporting bodies .... all protecting the Women's category in sports.

No not all, you are exaggerating a minority number to represent a majority. Not only that it is not reflect the views of all women - not that I think it has to be meaningful, but that does tend to be something you claim.

My own opinion happens to be that decisions are based on a lack of scientific available on the basis that insufficient scientific knowledge exists.

It is a very complex specialist area which is not circumvented with simplistic amateur views like ours.

 

[monkers]

It's not based on the ability to deliver them. It's based on reproductive pathways; of which there are only 2 in all mammals, whether they work correctly in individuals or not. If the entire population of the world became infertile overnight, there would still only be 2 sexes.

It's like saying that people who have long hair = women, and short hair = men. And people who are bald, part bald, undergoing chemo, choose to shave their heads? Well just leave them out because women have long hair and men have short hair: end of, which is your framing of the argument. Oh and people at the swimming pool wearing swim caps, we'll call them out as fake swimmers because they are not showing their hair. And women with short hair in the changing room are obviously men. This is how ridiculous this argument sounds to me.

 

[AuroraSaab]

None of which decrees that gender identity can not exist, which is what we were talking about, and is your amateur opinion.

The proof that it exists seems to consist of people saying they have one. The WHO call gender identity 'a person's deeply felt, internal and individual experience of gender' .... that's nowhere near to saying it exists as a subjective, verifiable thing. The NHS say 'Gender identity is a way to describe a person's innate sense of their own gender' ..... again, it's personal and subjective. Just like a religious soul lol.

My own opinion happens to be that decisions are based on a lack of scientific available on the basis that insufficient scientific knowledge exists.

In sports? Loads of evidence exists of male advantage. You just have to look at World Records. Now that sports are looking at evidence and not giving in to lobbying by transactivists, the protections for women's sport are coming through.

 

[theclaud]

Convinced of what? She a fairly moderate and sensible voice on the gender critical side. Plenty of people seem to find her so.

Convinced that she's doing anything for women's rights. For my money she was previously an unobjectionable but not especially interesting philosopher of literature, who has let her prominence in the GC movement go to her head and is way out of her depth. Have you thought about getting some more interesting icons?

There seem to be plenty of gay people who feel Stonewall have lost their way and would prefer a group that focuses just on the interests of the LGB. Plenty of room for groups with different aspirations surely.

I have no problem whatsoever with people focusing their activism where they choose, or prioritising their interests over those of others within a movement. LGB Alliance is undeniably a reactive framing though - formed in opposition to the upsurge in trans rights activism and with the clear aim of unhitching the T from the other letters. OK in the abstract, I guess, but contrary to your habitual framing the reason for the solidarity amongst the letters is not mindless 'being kind', but an understanding or instinctive grasp that, to the dominant heteronormative culture, it's all the same - deviance of one kind or another, punishable, perverted, dirty, threatening, heralding the end of civilization, abnormal, unconscionable, unacceptable. Y'know, the sort of things your mate Posie decries to her husband over dinner or Lynton Crosby rings up senior Tories to get them puce about. Anyway it's not the first or only division amongst the four letters - Ls have dropped Gs and shunned Bs before and there arguably has been some rationale behind these splits, but none of it has ever been worth hitching your wagon to the GOP or the Tories or the Heritage Foundation or the Telegraph or GB News or any of these other bastards. Unless of course you never really had any skin in the game anyway and are just a fairly conventional straight person with nothing to lose from chucking others unde the bus...

 

[theclaud]

Were I a lass, I wouldn't want me in the gym changing room, and I wouldn't want a trans me either.

I think we can all get behind this sentiment.

 

[icowden]

The WHO's argument has hence far been cogent, your's has not.

You say that, but is it really?

The WHO have said that gender incongruence will no longer be a diagnosis listed under mental health in ICD11 which is not yet in use in any country and won't be in use in the UK until 2026 at the earliest*. Not only that, but ICD11 is a coding system. It isn't really used for anything else other than reporting to DOH and medical research. It's not a treatment and doesn't add any real clinical value to the record other than providing a method to get data from all records that match a given diagnosis. Not only that but current use of ICD10 in most systems require the codes to be crossmapped to SNOMED CT as that is the current coding standard for medical records, and under SNOMED it is categorised under Mental Health. Although again - that doesn't matter. The patient isn't interested in clinical coding - and for that matter neither is the doctor / psychiatrist / nurse etc. They don't even see the codes in some systems. They have just recorded that the patient has gender incongruence.

That said, I found an interesting article in Time magazine:-

“When you have a system that sets up someone’s very existence and identity in a diagnosis as a mental health condition, that feeds an enormous amount of stigma and drives people away,” Kyle Knight, researcher in the LGBT rights program at Human Rights Watch, tells TIME. “We have interviewed transgender people in Japan, Kazakhstan, Ukraine and Indonesia to name a few countries, and they don’t even want to begin to undergo the process of legal recognition because it requires them to go see a psychiatrist who will tell them they have a so-called mental disorder; something that they don’t feel corresponds with their own reality. People don’t feel like their gender identity is something diagnosable or needs a diagnosis.”

And yet, if you want to do something about your gender incongruence, there isn't anyone you can see to get treatment other than a psychiatrist in a Mental Health setting. So whilst a code has changed category, as I stated before - you still get referred to a gender identity clinic which will be run by a specialist Mental Health Trust. Your referral will still be on a Mental Health pathway and you will see Clinical Professionals trained in mental health.

If it is really not a mental health issue as the WHO state, then why is treatment needed and who will give that treatment, if mental health professionals are no longer appropriate?

I don't have a problem with the WHOs statement nor the change of category. It just doesn't really change anything at all, and certainly not for the patient.

*Based on my experience with the NHS and software upgrades I'd be surprised if it were implemented before 2030. Seriously. You have no idea just *how* slow it is to get change done in NHS software. Most systems aren't even using the current edition of ICD10!

 

[AuroraSaab]

Convinced that she's doing anything for women's rights. For my money she was previously an unobjectionable but not especially interesting philosopher of literature, who has let her prominence in the GC movement go to her head and is way out of her depth. Have you thought about getting some more interesting icons?

The reason Kathleen Stock has risen in prominence is because transactivists in effect drove her out of her job. I don't think she's out of her depth at all.

Would you defend the right of KJK and the women who attend her events to meet, within the law, without intimidation or violence?

LGB Alliance is undeniably a reactive framing though - formed in opposition to the upsurge in trans rights activism and with the clear aim of unhitching the T from the other letters.

It seems to be founded by long time gay rights campaigners. If people want to support it they will or they won't. You seem to be saying that the community has always been of one view on these issues. I'm not sure they have, but even so it would be daft to expect people to continue to support something when they feel it's forced teaming.

Anyway it's not the first or only division amongst the four letters ..... but none of it has ever been worth hitching your wagon to the GOP or the Tories or the Heritage Foundation or the Telegraph or GB News or any of these other bastards.

I think you do the gay community a disservice by suggesting that wanting an organisation that advocates only for gay people means 'hitching your wagon' to the right wing. If gay people feel they have nothing in common with the trans community, or aren't happy being told they aren't same sex attracted but same gender attracted, why shouldn't they move on from Stonewall etc? Do people have to stay with a movement they feel no longer serves them out of loyalty?

'If you leave they'll say you're right wing' is just manipulation to compel allegiance and maintain what some obviously see as forced teaming.

 

[Deleted member 159]

The proof that it exists seems to consist of people saying they have one. The WHO call gender identity 'a person's deeply felt, internal and individual experience of gender' .... that's nowhere near to saying it exists as a subjective, verifiable thing. The NHS say 'Gender identity is a way to describe a person's innate sense of their own gender' ..... again, it's personal and subjective. Just like a religious soul lol.


In sports? Loads of evidence exists of male advantage. You just have to look at World Records. Now that sports are looking at evidence and not giving in to lobbying by transactivists, the protections for women's sport are coming through.

Exactly, male sportsmen declaring themselves a woman smashes 'Trans' record to prove the point. Canada the most woke country
Trans was mightily pissed off


View: https://youtu.be/6AWcjqmFPP0


IAAF has banned Trans from entering women's races. British Cycling has made male category open for all. More decisions like this will be coming. Trans can compete in the open male categories. with them being male in the first place

 

[multitool]

You do know that trans women have to undergo two years of hormone therapy to compete, don't you?

 

[Deleted member 159]

You do know that trans women have to undergo two years of hormone therapy to compete, don't you?

No they dont, not in Canada.

Rock up, state 'I feel like a woman' away you go


View: https://youtu.be/ZJL4UGSbeFg