55

72 comments

"A few months after a sexual assault...she started taking testosterone."

"A few months after a sexual assault...she started taking testosterone."

"A few months after a sexual assault...she started taking testosterone."

How can no one connect the dots??

CONNECT THE FUCKING DOTS, PEOPLE!!

They can connect the dots. They just don't care. Ideology trumps everything else. We shouldn't let them get away with feigning ignorance.

That part was so chilling. They didn't even bother helping that girl process her sexual trauma before telling her that injecting man juice into her body will solve all her problems.

But if people connect the dots, how will big pharma continue to get paid out? Think about the hormone companies and corrupt doctors won’t you??? /s

Moreover, how will the depraved men leading this movement continue normalizing sexual abuse.

I had one the top most recommended reader comments and it was just removed. TiPs hate facts.

Typical NYT move, but it's satisfying to know that they keep on removing comments and they keep on coming back in greater numbers. I imagine the comment moderator standing on the beach trying to stop the wave from hitting the sand.

Thanks for that. I've been a subscriber for almost 30 years, getting the paper editions on Sundays back in the early 90s when I could barely afford much more than ramon noodles. It's a gut punch because they are treating long-time commentators so poorly. I know how to be civil, I know the language loopholes I need to go through to get a comment up, yet one 'report' from a TRA and my comment is pulled. It's maddening.

It may be too late this time, but would it be possible to archive with comments or otherwise document your comments in the future? In my experience many doubt that NYT is deleting comments and having proof on hand would be great peak material.

I really should have...I was waiting for it to get to the top or second place (it was in 4th w/ over 200 likes). Next time, I need to keep screen grabbing.

Do it! At any rate I’m sorry that happened to you and I know it frustrates me that they get away with it because they are one of the remaining institutions that still has some amount of trust. Hell I think they do valuable reporting on other topics.

Glad to see the comment section wasn’t having it (last I checked anyway)

Nowhere does this article call "top surgery" by its correct name, double mastectomy. That's deliberate and shameful.

I wrote a letter to the editor to that affect, not that they’ll likely care.

To Whom It May Concern,

I find it troubling that a paper of your repute would consistently use a euphemism throughout an article regarding a surgery. Would you refer to heart bypass surgery as “ticker surgery”? I think it unlikely.

Teens are receiving mastectomies. That is the proper terminology and it should be used when discussing it.

One could infer from your refusal to use the correct term that you are purposefully trying obfuscate the seriousness of a major and irreversible surgery being performed on minors.

Great letter! I love the "ticker surgery" example - examples can be so effective.

The cutesy names are purposeful. They serve to minimize the serious nature of the surgery and make it sound no more serious than a pedicure or a haircut

[–] Hera 42 points Edited

Around 3,200 girls aged 13 to 19 received cosmetic breast implants in 2020

What the FUCK?!

This is obviously skewed data because they are including adults in this figure as well as children, but THIRTEEN?! Ok I feel like our movement definitely needs to start addressing this one as well when we talk about unnessecary cosmetic surgery on children. Who are these surgeons doing this? They need to be named and shamed just as much as the gender ghouls. I had no idea this was a thing. How could they ever do such monstrous things to young girls?

(Though shame on the writer for implying breast reductions are anything like cosmetic implants or cosmetic trans surgeries. I know two girls who had to have them as teens because their breasts were so naturally huge they were crushing their lungs to the point where suffocation was a real risk and bowing their spines. Fuck that writer.)

True story: For a lot of actual reasons to have certain surgery, the guideline is full adulthood, for the obvious reason that a person is still developing physically.

One example is one of my kids is missing an adult tooth — she had all her baby teeth, but one of them didn’t have a corresponding adult replacement. Her dad had the same thing, so we asked when we could schedule for her to have an implant.

The oral surgeon said no one would even agree to the surgery until she was 20 or 21.

It makes zero sense why any purely cosmetic surgery would not follow those same guidelines.

Just for the record, there's not complete unanimity about the age restrictions like the oral surgeon you went to says. I have a child who had an implant for an injured tooth that had to be removed earlier than that - 16 or 17, IIRC. Before proceeding, we consulted top prosthodontists and maxillofacial-oral surgeons who were experts in implants and had been in their fields since before implants became a satisfactory and widely available option. Said child is over 30 now and there's still no problem with the implant. Though as with any implant, crown or veneer, the part that is below the gum might have to be replaced in time, in part because everybody's teeth shift over the years.

Agree with your point and don’t doubt your experience, but my sibling had a dental implant under the same circumstances at age 15. I wonder if the guidance has changed.

It could just be that some dentists are more cautious than others on account of bad experiences with former patients

[–] ProxyMusic 18 points Edited

I think it's appalling that any young women or girls are having breast augmentation. However, I believe,t he statement that

Around 3,200 girls aged 13 to 19 received cosmetic breast implants in 2020

Was worded with the intent to deceive or at least mislead.

My hunch is that most of the "girls" age 13 to 19 who had breast augmentation in the USA in 2020 were women aged 18 and 19. I am sure that there are shady surgeons who are willing to augment the breasts of minor age girls by surgically implanting sacs of silicone or saline in their chests, but the party line taken by cosmetic surgeons and their organizations is that they won't do this on anyone under 18. In part to cover their own asses, because it's hard to get the desired outcomes on patients so young that their breasts are still developing and growing.

Another difference is that health insurance in the USA does not pay for cosmetic breast augmentation for anyone. But health insurance in the USA does pay for double mastectomies on troubled teenage girls so long as the breasts amputations are done for reasons of "gender affirmation" and the girls can get a letter from a therapist approving such surgery. Nowadays, such letters can be obtained easily in one visit to a gender therapist, or via a single short consult online, very few questions asked. At a recent Pride celebration somewhere in the US, gender vendors had a tent/booth where they were providing letters of approval for surgeries right there on the spot to anyone just for the asking - and for, of course, a fee.

[–] pennygadget 13 points Edited

At a recent Pride celebration somewhere in the US, gender vendors had a tent/booth where they were providing letters of approval for surgeries right there on the spot to anyone just for the asking - and for, of course, a fee.

That shit should be illegal. I can't imagine any other major surgery or drug referral being obtainable at a goddam carnival booth

This exactly. That statistic is carefully designed to elicit outrage and misdirect attention. I don’t doubt some 17-and-unders somewhere get breast augs, and that’s absolutely wrong, but we all know that number is mostly comprised of 18+. Good point as well about the insurance aspect.

[–] vulvapeople 4 points Edited

I'd guess the youngest is 16, and even then it's rare. It's still wrong, and I'd be happy to see state legislatures ban that for under-18s.

I don't think the government can micromanage medicine, which means professional associations and standards should make the call on appropriate health care most of the time (and take action against doctors who don't follow those protocols), but it's clear that those associations aren't doing their due diligence regarding cosmetic surgery on minors, and they're completely captured regarding trans procedures. This is exactly where government should get involved.

Yeah that statistic shocked me too. I don’t know how difficult it is to remove a breast implant but I feel it would at least be more reversible than trying to reverse a mastectomy.

Just found the comment that questioned the way the data on teen breast cosmetic surgeries was used. The article was trying to conflate 'top surgery' with other cosmetic breast surgery.

Apparently about half these cosmetic surgeries for teenagers are to address issues from conditions such as “severe asymmetry, tubular breast deformity, and Poland syndrome” according to “Considerations in Breast Augmentation in the Adolescent Patient” Sumanas W. Jordan, MD, PhD and Julia Corcoran, MD, FACS, FAAP, National Library of Medicine

[–] Hera 5 points Edited

I didn't even know these conditions existed. This is honestly one of the reasons why I love Ovarit so much, I wish female-specific conditions like this were talked about more in the mainstream.

And this actually makes the writer's comparison all the more sinister. The way they spoke about it in the article made me assume kids were getting breast expansions to look like pornstars or some shit. A quick google search shows these conditions can limit someone's quality of life, and surgery can help. I am beside myself (and now even more disgusted) that they tried to compare surgery designed to alleviate the suffering that comes from actual deformities to cutting off healthy breasts in patients that are universally mentally ill and delusional, and thus need mental help rather than government sanctioned self-harm.

Some augmentation is done on a single breast for 'alignment'. Of course, this is cosmetic, but it's a different type vs. just wanting bigger breasts.

Though shame on the writer for implying breast reductions are anything like cosmetic implants or cosmetic trans surgeries.

That's how they justify this. By pretending that cosmetic trans surgeries on healthy kids are exactly the same as breast reductions or hysterectomies done on "cis" women for legitimate medical reasons

There were some comments who called into question this stat, noting that the study it pulled from has been misused. Some listed that most of the augmentation surgeries were on 18-19 year old women and that many of the cosmetic surgeries were on breast reduction (to relieve back problems or for those who were obese) or alignment (when one breast is extremely different in size or shape). I'm not saying that some surgeries were needed (not sure if breast reduction should happen before weight management is addressed), but that stat isn't painting a full picutre.

My god, this is sloppy reporting. "Medical experts approve"--who?

"Genital surgeries in adolescents are exceedingly rare, surgeons said, but top surgeries are becoming more common."--what surgeons said this?

"Major medical groups have condemned the bans"--who? Clicked through. Oh--"United States Professional Association for Transgender Health." That's like citing the National Rifle Association in a story about gun violence. And what's with multiplying them into more than one group? And are they major? I've never heard of them and have no reason to trust them.

Someone in comments also pointed out they selected the detransitioner study with the fewest subjects when there are at least two with substantially more.

Its just like how the tobacco companies were allowed to investigate themselves back in the day. Of course they're going to conclude that the product that makes them money is wonderful and safe. Why the fuck wouldn't they?

TRAs: "They're not doing any surgeries on minors!"

Dr. Gallagher, whose unusual embrace of platforms like TikTok has made her one of the most visible gender-affirming surgeons in the country, said she performed 13 top surgeries on minors last year, up from a handful a few years ago. One hospital, Kaiser Permanente Oakland, carried out 70 top surgeries in 2019 on teenagers aged 13 to 18, up from five in 2013, according to researchers who led a recent study.

Just found the comment that questioned the way the data on teen breast cosmetic surgeries was used. The article was trying to conflate 'top surgery' with other cosmetic breast surgery.

Apparently about half these cosmetic surgeries for teenagers are to address issues from conditions such as “severe asymmetry, tubular breast deformity, and Poland syndrome” according to “Considerations in Breast Augmentation in the Adolescent Patient” Sumanas W. Jordan, MD, PhD and Julia Corcoran, MD, FACS, FAAP, National Library of Medicine

Dr. Gallagher of Miami said that she follows up with patients for up to a year. “I can say this honestly: I don’t know of a single case of regret,” Dr. Gallagher said in May, adding that regret was much more common with cosmetic procedures.

What a liar she is... wow. There are a ton of reddit people who complain about her "work".

WOW! WHAT A SHOCK! Doctor Tiktok wasn't entirely honest about the experiences of her cash cows!!

For real, do they really expect Gallagher to be honest with them and risk losing money? LOL

I can't stand this, it's sickening. The NYT supported the Vietnam war, the Iraq invasion, and tons of other things I knew were wrong. But somehow this sickens me more. Maybe because of the stupidity on top of the wickedness.

For me, it's because it's kids and underage teens.

[–] ProxyMusic 18 points Edited

Lot of kids and underage teens were horribly affected by the Vietnam war and the US invasion of Iraq, though. Many were maimed and killed. The difference was, the kids directly injured and traumatized in those wars lived in Southeast Asia and the Middle East, not in the USA. Of course, there were kids in the US who were negatively affected psychologically and materially because their dads, mothers or brothers served in those wars. But the kids directly injured and most traumatized lived thousands of miles away in lands the US government regarded as "enemy territory."

Yeah, exactly. The extra-sickening part of my reaction is unrelated to the material harm, which is way less than the material harm of a war. It's more about the collective stupidity of my own political (ex)tribe.

I think what bothers me most is that all my progressive friends think the Times is the gold standard for journalism and being on the "right side of history". That publication has been ghoulish for longer than I've been alive.

If you read this article closely, it's more balanced than I was expecting. It still misuses data and the author clearly didn't do any digging on the matter, but it's pretty damning in some of the facts it presents, for example, proving that yes, younger teen girls are getting this surgery, how much it costs and how it's advertised on TikTok (suggesting greed and malpractice).

I have no illusions about their editorial policy but they still have one of the best, most extensive reporting networks around the US and the world in a time of shrinking news budgets. I try to support that with my subscription.

But yeah, the news outlets whose reporting I usually trust (NYT, WaPo, NPR) seem to be doubling down on transfoolery the more public opinion rejects it, and it’s pissing me off. I can just see smug idiots, probably smarmy recent interns, thinking they’re on some kind of human rights crusade. I pay for the reporting, not the trans idiocy.

Yes, my friends and neighbors all drink the water from this tap. Think for yourselves, people, I want to yell, as the "support trans kids" signs start to pop up all over the neighborhood.

“support trans kids” signs

I haven’t seen this yet, but *vom*. I’m more tempted than ever to make stickers saying “TRANSING THE GAY AWAY” to put under the word STOP on signs.

Stupidity, paternalism and wickedness. NYT schools its readers in some pretty insulting ways. Way better than Fox, but that doesn't make it good.

[+] [Deleted] 14 points
Load more (2 comments)