156

Did anyone in the US see it just now? I’ll add a link as soon as it’s put online.

Edit:

The full piece is here, along with some extra footage and info about it.

Did anyone in the US see it just now? I’ll add a link as soon as it’s put online. **Edit:** [The full piece is here, along with some extra footage and info about it. ](https://www.cbsnews.com/news/60-minutes-transgender-health-care-issues-2021-05-23/)

127 comments

Several detrans women were interviewed. They talked about how quickly they were able to get hormones and surgery. A doctor mentioned that many doctors and psychologists are scared to speak out. They talked about how there’s no medical training, or certificate for doctors to get in order to treat trans patients. The term “blindly affirmed” was said several times. They mentioned the detrans subreddit and just how many people were part of the community. I hope this episode is just the beginning of shining a light on this.

[–] gnarlyfem [OP] 74 points Edited

From the link above:

"I think we spoke to more people on this story than any other story I can remember reporting on in my whole time at 60 Minutes," Stahl told 60 Minutes Overtime. "We wanted to be thorough. We wanted to be fair. And we wanted to understand every aspect of this story. And it was really focused on health care. That was the primary idea for the story. Health care."

Stahl told 60 Minutes Overtime that she cannot remember another story she has worked on at 60 Minutes where comments and criticisms began surfacing from advocates before the piece aired.

"We were concerned that the groups that oppose transgender people might try to weaponize our story and use it against transgender people," Stahl said. "Some of the activists who reached out to us told us they were worried about it too. Our story was really about health care. And we wanted to keep it focused on health care and not make it a political story."

Interesting. “Just about healthcare.” Well that’s the root of this whole thing. If there was proper protocols on who’s allowed to be trans, then a lot of the things we’re concerned about, wouldn’t be as big of an issue as they are.

[–] zuubat 61 points Edited

"We were concerned that the groups that oppose transgender people might try to weaponize our story and use it against transgender people," Stahl said.

Weaponize.

Which of course is far worse than the act of sending rape threats, death threats, and bomb threats, which we can safely assume arrived in short order at the virtual and actual mail rooms of CBS and its staff.

It struck me immediately too. "Weaponize" I guess has come to mean "say anything about it that is not nodding along and giving a round of applause and full throated unquestioning endorsement." I wonder if Stahl and others are capable of recognizing just how profusely they are apologizing for even getting near these issues.

[–] Rodham 60 points Edited

Good on CBS and Stahl for moving forward and not caving. You can tell they put a lot of time and effort into putting out a good faith piece. Stahl handles the concerns very well and you can tell she's trying her hardest to be delicate but fair (not like it will matter).

Also, I really saw myself in Grace's story. Thank god this stuff wasn't around when I was a teen.

“Just about healthcare.” Well that’s the root of this whole thing.

Yup. At core it's about biology: the needs women (including for safety) have as a result of their different biology, and the protection of children from having their bodies damaged.

This is great. I was worried this piece wasn't going to be critical at all.

[–] Rodham 66 points Edited

It's shocking to see. Journalistic standards for trans topics are so fucking low, I'm actually shocked this was able to air. A piece about detransitioners is what got Katie Herzog cancelled, and here it is on one of the most established news shows in the US.

I know longer feel sorry for her for what she did to Graham Lineham. But you’re right. Her career was jacked up.

When everything except fast, blind approval will get you cancelled, that's what you're gonna do. Can't even fully blame these doctors.

I still blame the doctors. "First do no harm." If they know patients are being harmed and do nothing because they're afraid, they're morally culpable. They need to step away from gender medicine in that case.

I just watched it! I hope they eventually release more footage of their interviews with THIRTY DETRANSITIONERS!

They talked about the accelerated transition timelines and doctors' fear of speaking out. I hope they're setting themselves up for a "follow the money" follow-up segment. I'm just floored they aired this segment at all!

[–] Rodham 100 points

I think the kid who got his testicles removed and breast implants will really hit people in a visceral way. The way he spoke about wanting to kill himself was heartbreaking. Suicide is weaponized so much by trans organizations (and the HRC advocate interviewed) and yet transition is not always an adequate prevention.

He broke my heart. I was struck by how young they all were. Impressionable kids just trying to feel better, too young and naive to realize they were manipulated. The conversation about the weaponization of suicide and transition being peddled as a cure-all needs to be had.

That kid is gay, too. I was really hoping they would touch on how so many of these young transitioners are gay or lesbian.

[–] Eava 18 points

When she said he had his testicles removed 3 months after starting hormones I almost cried. How can any surgeon castrate a minor in good conscience?

I was so shocked that he had his testicles removed. Obviously I’ve heard of that.... but I guess I didn’t think it was a first/second step procedure.... there’s literally NO going back. It’s be like having a full hysterectomy as a first or second step! So crazy!

[–] gentoo 78 points Edited

I'm seeing some concerns from the detrans individuals who were interviewed that the episode didn't focus enough on detransitioners. Not entirely sure what the policy on linking Twitter posts is, feel free to yell at me if I need to edit.

I’m gonna be completely honest. I was part of a 4 person group interview that lasted around an hour long. They proceeded to only show maybe 5 mins MAX about only 2 of us from that group. Extremely upset right now. The fact is, I was told from the very start this was going to be a 60 Minutes segment about detransitioners and it was turned into something else. That’s extremely upsetting to me because I interviewed for this piece thinking it would be about detransition specifically. (source) (source 2)

I am deeply disappointed in tonight's "episode" by @\CBSNews @\60Minutes I was told when interviewed by @\collette_rich that the episode was to be specifically about detransitioning and the issues we face as detrans people, including hate we endure from the trans community. There were a couple interviews with detrans people in the episode but the focus was much more on the struggles of transgender individuals and healthcare. Thanks for giving us a true, uninterrupted, and unbiased voice. (source)

Still, I'm glad that a major TV station is at least willing to recognize detransitioners. I just hope their stories will be treated fairly and not used to push an agenda.

I guess a silver lining is that a bunch of people in very high places in media (editors, producers, executives maybe, and of course Leslie Stahl herself) saw all of these stories and heard hours of interviews. Maybe it could be the start of a shift in thinking behind the scenes.

Hope so. 60 minutes is super mainstream as well. Every person I know who does not live online usually will catch it. A lot of people will see this before they see anything on Twitter, Reddit, and various pro-TRA sites.

I saw a tweet saying that the story was leaked and then possibly the slant was changed under pressure. This was just a random tweet so take it for what it’s worth.

The detrans guy who is mad about being interviewed for an hour? He’s young and naive. This is typical in interviews, especially given that 30 (!) detrans people were interviewed. At the end of the day, his story was less interesting than the others. Apparently the narcissism didn’t end after detransitioning.

Ah, I forgot to include a second follow-up tweet (link) from the detrans guy. I think they were upset because they were told the episode would focus on detransitioners, but instead much of the episode ended up being about trans healthcare and only a few detrans interviews actually made it into the episode.

Apparently the narcissism didn’t end after detransitioning.

I think this is a little harsh. Yeah, he's young and naive, but most people don't realize that it's common to be interviewed for an hour and only have one snippet, if that, included in a piece. Journalists who interview people tend to be good at making others feel like what they have to say is important, relevant, and interesting. It can feel shitty to know that all that talking amounted to nothing, especially given that people tend to prepare for their interviews beforehand and often really feel invested in and passionate about what they're talking about. Especially even more so when what they're talking about is their life!

I wonder did they set their expectations unrealistically high? They sound quite young.

A TiM gynecologist who has performed 2000 trans surgeries? what? o.o

Isn’t that the dr that messed up Jazz Jenning’s privates?

Yes, article here

“This has been a real journey, hasn’t it? We knew it would be tough—it turned out tougher than any of us imagined,” Bowers tells Jazz's family. “I think in hindsight we would have never sent you home from the hospital. You know, easy to say now. When I wasn’t here when you had problems and had to go back, I can’t tell you how stressful that was.”

Bowers is such a narcissist. I forget what exact surgery Jazz was having, but there was another surgeon in the operating room with Bowers. Some complication came about Jazz not having enough skin around his genitals or something (I can’t remember), and they legit had an argument in the middle of the surgery. The two surgeons couldn’t agree on how to move forward, but I think Bowers ended up getting his way, and it ended up making things worse for Jazz.

[–] montanagraey 8 points Edited

Yeah I was very curious about this also...

I think he may be a transsexual and apparently he’s done a lot of free clitoral reconstructions for FGM victims. So ¯_(ツ)_/¯

Just saw it too. Hoping this will open up more discussion in US media. Kudos to 60 Minutes and to the detransitioners who appeared on the program.

[–] MenHaveItEasy Moid Respecter 51 points Edited

That preview was irritating. For one, the constant tiptoeing around not wanting to give "hate" groups ammunition. Major news organizations routinely report on controversial topics, but Ive never seen that kind of fearful disclaimer before. Im surprised that they went through with it at all to be honest - and I hope that the actual episode isnt entirely devoted to pro-TRA pandering. If this story was the other way around, there would be no counter-argument saying that transitioning isnt always sunshine and roses. But that's how they're trying to frame the experience of people who've destransitoned, that its a political move and "both sides" deserve a say. Or rather, one side steal the spotlight to make sure their "opponent" is edged out of their own story.

Two, Marci Bowers was the doctor who butchered Jazz Jenning's genitals. Notice how like the lawyer, he never answers the question about how easy it is for kids to get prescribed drugs, hormones and surgeries. He moves the goalpost to talk about how the real issue is that there's too many doctors who arent qualified to perform SRS. This is less a knock at the Taiwanese doctors who are willing to do these surgeries for peanuts, but an argument that SRS should be more easily available in countries like the US.

Out of the three interviewed, its the lawyer who angered me the most. He made this completely political, gave no shits to the people who've been hurt by aggressive transitioning, and whined that if they were going to do a story like this - probably the only one ever aired on US television, that they should have gave "their side" most of the time to talk about how awesome being transgender is, and any regret is virtually none. As if most media doesnt constantly talk about how awesome being transgender is anyway.

The lawyer / HRC head guy is always that annoying - all that ever comes out of his mouth is platitudes and propaganda. He spoke at the Equality Act hearing earlier this year (the one that Abigail Shrier also spoke at), and he literally said the exact same statements that he said in this show. I have never trusted public figures who can't answer questions directly and revert to a scripted non-answer. It shows that they don't really believe in what they're saying and know that they can't answer the question without revealing their own heretical thoughts.

Yes, I remember him from those hearings. He was asked point blank if there were more than two sexes which he did contortions trying not to answer but ended up saying yes. I hope the paycheque from TransInc is worth the credibility crater.

That preview was irritating. For one, the constant tiptoeing around not wanting to give "hate" groups ammunition. Major news organizations routinely report on controversial topics, but I've never seen that kind of fearful disclaimer before.

Exactly.

[–] Raea 41 points

I just watched it. I'm so disappointed because all of The advocates talking about this allegedly marginalized population. I kept replacing transgender population with the word women and was yelling at my screen because no one is standing up for us and when we try to stand up for ourselves we just get smacked down

I'm not disappointed at all. It was a fair journalistic piece that examined both sides. That's what we should hope for, not someone repeating our talking points verbatim. This was monumental. Kudos to 60 minutes and Leslie Stahl.

There are not always two sides to every story. If you want to discuss lunar geology you don't invite someone who believes the moon is made of green cheese and belongs to a cult with that beleif. In fact you make sure that anyone who believes that is never allowed to teach lunar geology.

I understand but it is frustrating that everything else that is out there repeats their talking points verbatim.

We are all hoping for some sort of expose to balance out the conversation in general.

You're right.

I thought Ms Stahl was fantastic. And although the format was a little shorter than I expected the journalism itself was excellent.

I suppose it just isn't very often where the value of women is so blatantly obvious.

And it's toxic to fall into the "what about meeee" feelings but I couldn't help myself from bitterly imagining a world where 60 minutes does a 13 minute investigative piece on how difficult it is for women to get healthcare. How doctors don't listen to women when they are suffering. How the government appears to be arbitrarily restricting the ability of women to seek treatment that they want or need.

It's ironic, isn't it? TRAs freaked out that 60 Minutes wanted to do a piece on detransitioners, because they thought that it would attract hate towards trans people. So they pressured 60 Minutes into including more information about trans healthcare.... But the segment still features detransitioners in a substantial way, and so instead the whole effort backfired. The new framing implies that not only are detrans voices and stories important and worthy of being heard for their own sake, they're worthy of being heard by anyone who wants to understand trans healthcare!

I understand that many detrans people are upset that their voices and stories are featured less than they were told they would be. But in terms of the political outcome, this new framing might end up having more lasting effects on how doctors and therapists interact with their patients.

I understand that many detrans people are upset that their voices and stories are featured less than they were told they would be.

I get why they’d be upset, but they have to realize the entire segment was less than 15 minutes long. I’m shocked they got in as much info as they did. The fact that they showed how many detrans people were interviewed, says a lot. At least they were able to focus on a few detrans stories, which is more than anyone could have hoped for, honestly.

[–] mathwitch 18 points Edited

I was pleasantly surprised by the segment, but we absolutely could have hoped for more. Dr. Beers received very little pushback, for example.

I'm mainly just amused at the passage from "You can't have a segment only about detransitioners! You have to also talk about how transition HELPS most people!" to "You can't have a segment about trans health mention detransitioners! Why were they included in a segment about trans health at all!"

TRAs will not be happy at anything less than the total disappearance of dissenting or doubting voices. Their arguments can't survive pushback. And their efforts to silence people are starting to backfire.

Yeah, that's just sort of a factor of hours of footage getting compressed into 15 minutes. I would absolutely love for all 30 full interviews to be released, but I doubt that would ever happen.

And they also acknowledged how much the (lgb)T orgs and activists tried to control their reporting!

Very nice. I worry that they had to couch so much of their language and tip toe around the crazy advocates that the point of the piece will be muted. I hope this encourages further episodes that will critically examine what’s going on with children especially and give a voice to women who are being hurt by trans agenda (most notably women in prisons, shelters and in sports).

I hope that jerk from the Human Rights Campaign was relegated to the Overtime segment. What the hell relevance does he even have to transitioners or detransitioners? He's just there to concern troll for political reasons.

Nah he was in the main segment. I thought his answer in the OT segment was so weak though, logically. How does talking about detransitioners hurt trans people? I don't get it. Like Grace said, it helps them. All trans people deserve better healthcare, pretending detrans people don't exist actively harms all of them. His point about necessary context made sense, though you could tell he was still unhappy about the piece despite the context being supplied, again and again.

Too bad, but at least he must be seething that he didn't get to control the narrative.

How does talking about detransitioners hurt trans people? I don't get it.

It's not about logic or safeguarding. Detransitioners are an inconvenient fact. Acknowledging them contradicts the party line, which is the fantasy that every trans person is "true trans" and is merely embracing who they were born to be. Therefore it calls into question the ethics of what they are doing to vulnerable children and teenagers. That's why they're so upset about it. That's why they try to place blame on detransitioners themselves, silence their voices, and spread lies about them.

[–] [Deleted] 25 points Edited

though you could tell he was still unhappy about the piece despite the context being supplied, again and again.

Exactly. He was upset the piece was even covering the different sides. He and TRA's would have preferred to not air the detransitioners' side at all. Luckily they didn't have the power to censor CBS* here.

The fact that both TRA's and some GC detransitioners have complaints about the segment just shows that they did an okay job of covering both sides.

Grace was really eloquent on that point. Impressive young woman

Load more (23 comments)