40

Why are teenage girls given puberty blockers? Even for teenage boys the benefits are nebulous. But with teenage girls, what are they getting in exchange for sterility, brain damage and osteoporosis? No one seems to know. The ostensible benefits are that it helps them “pass” when they’re older. But of course it doesn’t. It makes them shorter, and height is the biggest giveaway with TIFs.

Girls want them anyway, because they don’t want to go through puberty. Girls damaging themselves because puberty is horrific is hardly a new thing. But adults helping them do it, on an industrial scale, is new.

If the goal really was to help them pass as adults, you’d give teenage TIFs human growth hormone, to make them taller than they would have been otherwise. But no one seems to have even considered that. Why?

The girls themselves might not want HGH, because it wouldn’t help them stave off puberty. But the adults in charge - who are supposed to be thinking of the long term future of these girls and are ostensibly doing all this to help them be passable transmen in future - why didn’t they think of this? They certainly aren’t averse to wild medical experimentation on children in the name of “passing” and HGH is at least safer than Lupron.

This made something click for me… what if the goal for the adults was always the same as the goal for the girls? It’s not making them look like men. It’s helping them avoid puberty. The girls will end up shorter and weaker and mentally less developed than they would have been otherwise and if they never take T they won’t look like adults.

The transmen who get puberty blockers and then go on to take T aren’t the endgame here. The goal is to have adult human females who look like female children.

So I would really like to know who started the practice of putting teenage girls through the “Dutch protocol.” Why didn’t they question if it would be valuable for girls? I’m sure a lot of clinicians doing it are just useful idiots, chasing $$$ or just following the herd. But who started the stampede?

Why are teenage girls given puberty blockers? Even for teenage boys the benefits are nebulous. But with teenage girls, what are they getting in exchange for sterility, brain damage and osteoporosis? No one seems to know. The ostensible benefits are that it helps them “pass” when they’re older. But of course it doesn’t. It makes them shorter, and height is the biggest giveaway with TIFs. Girls want them anyway, because they *don’t want to go through puberty.* Girls damaging themselves because puberty is horrific is hardly a new thing. But adults helping them do it, on an industrial scale, is new. If the goal really was to help them pass as adults, you’d give teenage TIFs human growth hormone, to make them taller than they would have been otherwise. But no one seems to have even considered that. Why? The girls themselves might not want HGH, because it wouldn’t help them stave off puberty. But the adults in charge - who are supposed to be thinking of the long term future of these girls and are ostensibly doing all this to help them be passable transmen in future - why didn’t they think of this? They certainly aren’t averse to wild medical experimentation on children in the name of “passing” and HGH is at least safer than Lupron. This made something click for me… *what if the goal for the adults was always the same as the goal for the girls?* It’s not making them look like men. *It’s helping them avoid puberty.* The girls will end up shorter and weaker and mentally less developed than they would have been otherwise and if they never take T they won’t look like adults. The transmen who get puberty blockers and then go on to take T aren’t the endgame here. The goal is to have adult human females who look like female children. So I would really like to know who started the practice of putting teenage girls through the “Dutch protocol.” Why didn’t they question if it would be valuable for girls? I’m sure a lot of clinicians doing it are just useful idiots, chasing $$$ or just following the herd. But who started the stampede?

17 comments

[–] Fury 12 points

Well, yeah, only pedos would ever have an interest in keeping kids from going through puberty.

Interesting points. Did you hear the Gender: A Wider Lens interview with the creators of the 'Dutch protocol'? It was utterly appalling. Hard to believe those people were actually scientifically trained.

I didn’t hear that! I will listen.

I’m actually surprised, I had the impression the Dutch Protocol originators were relatively responsible. At least the screened the kids and didn’t experiment on the ones who were just confused or mentally ill.

But I guess they were only responsible relative to the people who came after them.

Haha no. It was 'first come first served'. I actually quit listening to Gender A Wider Lens after listening to this because it was horrific--but then Stella and Sasha did another episode where they said they found it as horrific as everyone else listening to them did.

https://gender-a-wider-lens.captivate.fm/episode/66-pioneers-series-where-it-all-started-the-dutch-researchers-steensma-de-vries

https://gender-a-wider-lens.captivate.fm/episode/69-pioneers-series-post-series-analysis-break

These two episode are SO IMPORTANT.

And I do wonder when Jesse Singal will get around to readjusting his view on this.

You know what, I think I got my information on the subject from Jesse Singal, and he tends to give these people far too much credit. Idk why he even bothers any more, at this stage he could just up and say that the whole field of youth gender medicine is bullshit and riddled with psychopaths and shysters, and the field should not even exist. But he always pushes the “I’m so reasonable” line that some of the clinicians are good and that some kids really do benefit from transition.

Unless there is a deficiency in HGH, it won't make you taller. We discussed this with our endocrinologist for our daughter but there was no point because her HGH levels were normal.

[–] Tesserae_Tali 3 points Edited

As much as I despise any sort of underage transition, I think it would be better to just transition kids directly at puberty instead of compounding the harm with pubertal blockade. We know that puberty blockers don't give kids time to change their minds; they prevent the neurological and sexual development that might allow minors to reconcile with their biological sex. Once an individual child's gender dysphoria (whether genuine or of the Munchhausen-by-proxy variety) has been reified as a medical problem necessitating major endocrinological intervention, that's how it tends to remain. The trans train doesn't stop once it's left the station.

[–] disco_metal 3 points Edited

The girls will end up shorter and weaker and mentally less developed than they would have been otherwise and if they never take T they won’t look like adults.

The goal is to have adult human females who look like female children.

This is all too similar to that “eunuch archive” shit… except this is actually happening.

The stunted growth is what concerns me. If these girls go on blockers at 10 or 11- years-old, they end up being 4’11” or 5’ tall “boys.” I’ve seen a couple of pictures showing it. They will have a difficult time finding a partner, because most women want a partner who is taller than they are. I find that sad.

I didn't know about this, wow. Look at the many many comments on this video, poor kids, not getting the deal they thought they were signing up for: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0SKX-p9N6ks

[–] Tesserae_Tali 1 points Edited

Even if they grow up to be six feet tall, if they're trying to date as men, the lack of a penis is going to be a deal breaker.

[–] Ducil 3 points Edited

Delaying puberty should make people taller by delaying the closure of bone growth plates. People and animals castrated before puberty get bigger than they would have otherwise. Is there something different about the way the drugs work? I thought that was a treatment for kids who were too short, but maybe I'm remembering wrong.

Exogenous growth hormone can cause cancer if you don't have a deficiency.

In any case, I think it should be malpractice to mess with a perfectly normal child's development.

Blockers help kids with premature puberty grow taller. Doesn’t do anything for TIFs who are given them at age 14.

Exogenous growth hormone can cause cancer if you don't have a deficiency.

I assume it’s clear I wasn’t advocating this as a good idea! I’m saying that the evidence and patient safety standards at youth gender clinics wouldn’t rule it out.

I've thought the same. There is so much rampant pedophilia now that I would not even be surprised if they want them on these cancer drugs they dub "puberty blockers" for that purpose. Also, if they just don't want to have periods, can't they take birth control that helps with period suppression, instead?