33

47 comments

[–] shewolfoffrance 39 points (+39|-0)

Transing a teenager is a "mistake" the way letting a teenager get a tattoo is a "mistake," except that tattoos can be undone. You can't get your reproductive system back.

[–] worried19 39 points (+39|-0)

We still don't fucking know the life expectancy of these kids, either.

Everyone just ignores that. What happens if you run a female body on testosterone for 6 or 7 decades? Doctors have no clue, and they sure as hell don't seem to care.

[–] shewolfoffrance 25 points (+25|-0)

There is some evidence from the East German doping scandal. The women who were given testosterone-derived steroids often struggled with infertility and other health problems. This isn't exactly the same, but several studies have shown negative side effects when menopausal women start taking female hormones. Caution is absolutely warranted.

[–] NewMa 20 points (+20|-0)

I've known several women who were on estrogen supplements when they went menopausal "early" and had "side effects." Basically in the late 90s/early 00s, estrogen (Premarin at the time, nowadays they have synthetic) was Rx'd a lot, from what I can tell. At least, where I'm at it was definitely not uncommon. Anyway, here's my anecdotal results:

One went absolutely batshit insane. I'm not joking, she started beating her fifteen year old daughter, etc. Complete personality turnaround.

Another got breast cancer and died from it about nine years after she started taking the estrogen. Her "battle" wasn't even that long, albeit I will admit she was a serious smoker of the Virginia Slims.

I honestly wonder if the TiMs know the degree-to-which they're just science experiments. The Martin/e Rothblatts of the world can afford all the cancer prevention and treatment in the world to keep them alive forever (would not surprise me if he was an anti-aging stem cell experiment, not one iota of me would be surprised). But your normal "I bought my estrogen from a grey market supplier because fuck terfs gatekeeping!" dumbass TiM? He's, at best, a science experiment. Part of a cohort with no control....

[–] pennygadget 18 points (+18|-0)

We still don't fucking know the life expectancy of these kids, either.

This is the saddest thing about the trans kid fad. Its a giant, Mengele-esque mad science experiment. Nobody has any clue what depriving kids of their puberty entirely AND trying to replace it with cross-sex hormones will do to them long term. I'm pretty sure all the Jazz Jennings types are under 25. What happens to them when they hit their 30s? How long can the human body withstand that level of unnecessary abuse?

Sadly, I predict this shit will only end when kids like Jazz start dropping like flies and/or developing horrible, debilitating medical issues as they age

[–] XX_Power 10 points (+10|-0)

The puberty blocker kids will be the porn industries wet dream. Child like in body and mind but legally allowed to have sex and do porn. I foresee a whole new "barely legal" porn section with de facto children popping up in the next years...

[–] XX_Power 8 points (+8|-0)

We know that Buckangel nearly died. There will probably be a LOT of premature deaths in a couple of decades but the TIMs orchestrating this literally don't give a shit. Anything for the cooom

[–] lucretiamott 7 points (+7|-0)

"We still don't fucking know the life expectancy of these kids, either."

This is the point they bust out the suicide threats.

[–] hellamomzilla 33 points (+33|-0)

As someone who was a mother to a teen daughter who said she was trans and demanded that I provide her with hormones and surgery (and, of course, a new name and pronouns), allow me to explain that if my kid had shown any REAL independence, I would have taken out a billboard in Times Square to celebrate. Aside from demanding that other people follow her precise and ever-changing rules, she was basically sunk into her own anxiety and wouldn't do anything which required her to expend any energy. Her life wound up being her, at home all the time, sitting on a couch or in bed, playing games on her phone most of the day (while her friends were in school) and then Facetiming and locking her sisters out of their shared bedroom in the evenings.

The problem in my daughter's life was that she was a mentally ill girl, not a boy in a girl's body. She needed therapy, not being told lies and having her health damaged.

[–] MelMarieCurebee 11 points (+11|-0)

Brava, helamomzilla. Well done with the mothering. This is an astute observation.

[–] sarahsmile 7 points (+7|-0)

Yes! Girls are SO suggestible (all kids, but girls especially).

[–] HighQueenofFemmes 31 points (+31|-0) Edited

The job of a parent is to make sure that your children don't make any stupid, life-altering mistakes before they are autonomous adults. For example, there is nothing wrong with pregnancy, a lot women find fulfillment in it, and most never regret it. But if my 16 year-old daughter walked up to me one day and said, "Mom, I want to have a baby," I would tell her to wait, to graduate high school, to find a job, to find a mate, to think things through before making a decision that will change the trajectory of her life. I would also probably take it as a cue that maybe she wasn't getting enough love from me or the people around her, and was looking for it in other ways. But what I wouldn't do is hop into the car and drive her down to the fertility clinic to get inseminated. That would be wildly irresponsible and potentially damaging and CYS would probably get involved.

So why is this the expected reaction for parents whose children say they might be trans?

[–] VeggieAnnie 6 points (+6|-0)

This is the perfect analogy, much better than the tattoo analogy.

[–] lucrecia 18 points (+18|-0) Edited

Archive link: https://archive.is/sTSNx

FFS. Some choice quotes:

  • when children act with particular independence

  • Rowling, Shirer[sic], and other opponents of pediatric trans care

  • Bell later transitioned back to being female.

... ¬_¬ ...

  • [Shulamith Firestone] saw the path to liberation in divorcing the reproductive function from women’s biology, and in abolishing childhood. One might argue that young people who seek trans care are pursuing both of these projects, and that is why they inspire such panicked opposition.

  • People—including young people, acting legally, with their parents’ support—choose to[...]make what often amounts to commitments to lifelong medical intervention with S.S.R.I.s for depression or stimulants for attention deficit hyperactivity disorder [...] None of these decisions is just like the decision to transition. But are they really so much lighter, so much less consequential

(?!! OF COURSE they are! And people don't make a lifelong commitment to SSRIs, what are you talking about?)

  • In her 1970 book, Firestone discussed the arbitrary historical boundaries of childhood.

(big difference between 'culturally constructed' or 'imperfect but pragmatic' and 'arbitrary'...)

  • I began my own transition at fifty, long after experiencing the misery of pregnancy and the incomparable joy of breastfeeding. I have no regrets.

Right so your lack of regrets is completely irrelevant to the matter at hand, then.

  • Had I had the option of transitioning as a teen-ager, I would have chosen to do so—and I am almost certain that I would have had no regrets then, either, because I would have had a different life.

That's very easy to say when you haven't lived that different life.

  • To be able to talk about a range of transition options, at different times in life, we would need to change the terms of the debate. We would need to view both age and gender on a continuum, not as binary states.

I don't fucking believe it I literally wrote a story taking the piss out of this line of argument this week so that people could see how dangerous it was.

  • None of us has ever been as innocent and ignorant as the children of our imagination, and none of us will ever be as wise and competent as the adults we make ourselves out to be.

Speak for yourself, and stop trying to tell other people what they imagine.

  • What if we accepted that some losses are desirable and some are regrettable, and that we can’t always know the difference?

Is the loss of one's reproductive organs due to being conned regrettable, or desirable? We just don't know!

  • What if we knew that we are always changing not only as individuals but as societies, and the categories we use to sort ourselves mutate faster than we realize?

I think everyone's aware that societies change, and that nonetheless we have laws about what children can consent to for some very good reasons.

[–] Asha95 13 points (+14|-1)

Also SSRIs are not even close to inconsequential. They can permanently numb your genitals. Look up UK PSSD Association

[–] HighQueenofFemmes 10 points (+10|-0)

Also, SSRIs can lose their effectiveness over time. I was on Effexor twice, and each time it would lose it's effectiveness after two to three years, and I would increasingly lose my ability to orgasm.

[–] lucrecia 7 points (+7|-0)

Interesting, it seems to be treated as a footnote when prescribing... The people I know who've taken them luckily haven't experienced that (or haven't noticed if they have). Though even if they had, they'd still be able to have kids, so it still wouldn't be as big a decision as puberty blockers + cross-sex hormones, so I think the author's comparison still doesn't work!

[–] HighQueenofFemmes 9 points (+9|-0) Edited

Ah, well, it's a side note because for men, all they have to do is prescribe them some Viagra to counteract its effects. For women, who cares? Their sexual pleasure isn't important.

[–] Tabitha_Tuesday 3 points (+3|-0)

SSRIs can also lower seizure threshold and make a person more likely to develop dementia later in life.

I'm furious that none of this was told to me when they were being pushed on me by every primary care physician I saw.

Also I've never met a person who they worked for. Just horrible side effects.

[–] SilkySquid 18 points (+18|-0) Edited

“Women and children are always mentioned in the same breath,” the visionary feminist activist Shulamith Firestone observed in the book “The Dialectic of Sex: The Case for Feminist Revolution,” from 1970. “I submit . . . that the nature of this bond is no more than shared oppression. And that moreover this oppression is intertwined and mutually reinforcing in such complex ways that we will be unable to speak of the liberation of women without also discussing the liberation of children, and vice versa.” Firestone noted that women and children were inextricably linked not only by the women’s duty of childbearing and child rearing but by the obligation, for both groups, to maintain innocence, fragility, immaturity, and dependence on others. She saw the path to liberation in divorcing the reproductive function from women’s biology, and in abolishing childhood. One might argue that young people who seek trans care are pursuing both of these projects, and that is why they inspire such panicked opposition.

What the what? There's so much I'd want to say about that but I'm too angry and too tired. Plus it's almost too ridiculous to bother.

I was quite annoyed by the whole article... ending with an argument that, sure, some children will make mistakes but we should let children make mistakes. Yes... mistakes like not studying for a test and getting a bad grade for it, eating too much candy and getting a stomach ache, etc. Not mistakes that will reverberate through their life, mistakes that they will be unable to comprehend the lesson of until their brains are more mature. I'm not a fan of slippery slopes, but it felt like this woman was sentences away from arguing child consent for sexual abuse, etc.

EDIT: I will say, the one positive is that this is at least being talked about now. I'm glad there was some sort of coverage of Keira Bell. Also, I notice the phrase: "we need to change the terms of the debate" - yeah, because you're starting to lose the debate! So now you're saying it's no longer about what's best for the kids, but that kids should be able to have the freedom to do what's not best for themselves. Ugh.

[–] hmimperialtortie 12 points (+12|-0)

She saw the path to liberation in divorcing the reproductive function from women’s biology, and in abolishing childhood. One might argue that young people who seek trans care are pursuing both of these projects, and that is why they inspire such panicked opposition.

The fuck???

[–] RawSienna 14 points (+14|-0)

So your dog’s gender is irrelevant, there are many more interesting things about a being yadda yadda.

And then you spend the rest of the article using woqueisms (“assigned at birth”) and telling us how important it is that kids be able to “trans” to the other gender.

Fuck off, author, and fuck off, New Yorker, for presenting ideology as fact, using language that attempts to normalize the abhorrent and insulting people’s intelligence.

[–] Fait77 7 points (+7|-0)

I read a quote somewhere about the current New Yorker editor, "The magazine is his forest." Sadly it is true. The magazine has consistently promoted this misogynist agenda uncritically during his tenure. Now, the magazine that was so great for so long is no longer a magazine I want to read, and I stopped subscribing because of this crap.

[–] notgonnabenice 13 points (+13|-0) Edited

As heartbreaking as that admission is, all available data indicate that such regrets are exceedingly rare.

You mean don't collect data and then claim it's rare? Tavistock's data suddenly appeared after the trial, but the available info didn't seem to be in its favor.

[–] pennygadget 1 points (+1|-0)

Even if detransitioners were super rare, isn't it more ethical to err on the side of NOT castrating a physically healthy child? After all, a trans kid can still transition in adulthood if they want to. A kid who grows to regret transitioning cannot get back their fertility, their natural breasts, their sexual function, etc

[–] MelMarieCurebee 11 points (+11|-0)

The reason people ask the dog's sex is because it often does matter. You know, like if your dogs have intact reproductive systems and you need to know if a litter of puppies is on the horizon. Or because different dogs respond differently to other differently sexed dogs. Or if dogs have different behavior by sex. Like:

Will your dog lift its leg to piss on my fence or will your dog squat in the dirt part of the sidewalk and leave a rivulet of pee that might end up on one of our shoes if we don't move.

I personally usually ask the sex question first only if I haven't already sexed the dog on my own, and then only so the name will make more sense when I ask it. Dog names are often weird enough as it is without sex clues for their origin.

[–] gender_is_oppression 11 points (+11|-0) Edited

Bills that would ban trans care for young people have already been prefiled for this year’s legislative sessions in Alabama, Texas, and Missouri; last year, a similar bill was defeated in South Dakota, thanks to opposition from the pharmaceutical industry.

Little nugget tucked into the article without comment. The bill was defeated not because of the opposition of health care professionals, but because of the opposition of the pharmaceutical industry.

[–] hellamomzilla 6 points (+6|-0)

How does a supposed journalist WRITE THAT and not go, "Hmmmm. Why is the pharmaceutical industry supporting this?" Isn't BIG BAD PHARMA the usual go-to boogey-man of most journalists?

[–] sarahsmile 10 points (+10|-0) Edited

"Had I had the option of transitioning as a teen-ager, I would have chosen to do so—and I am almost certain that I would have had no regrets then, either, because I would have had a different life."

I teach high school English. If one of my students wrote this in an essay, I would have them revisit it because it is totally illogical. Perhaps the author can't see this clearly because, I don't know, SHE HAS A PERSONAL STAKE IN THE OUTCOME?

Load more (6 comments)