112

93 comments

[–] Jade 41 points

And they still use this rhetoric against us!

TRAs: If I take away my breasts I'm no longer a woman! I need to remove my breast so I can cease being a woman!

Handmaidens: Oh, so TERFs are saying that just because I had breast cancer and needed a mastectomy, then I'm no longer a woman?

No, Brenda, this is literally what THE OTHER SIDE is saying.

Dr Olsen-Kennedy - "The difficulty of genital surgery is that it is surgical sterilisation and people get super worked up about that....it is a barrier we have to overcome and I think we will."

These doctors need locking up for a very long time.

People's outrage over casually sterilizing gay and gender-nonconforming people is a barrier to overcome?! Is this what they mean by "queering boundaries"??

This, and putting penis in women's spaces is what they mean by queering boundaries, I'm pretty sure.

[–] Riothamus scrote 40 points

Hey, don't forget their attempts to "queer" the age of consent!

It's rather telling that the Postmodernists couldn't agree on workable alternatives to modern societal structures but they could definitely achieve consensus on fucking kids.

They say "queer" is a good thing now, and not a slur, and at the same time use "queer" as a verb to mean "violate." What the fuck.

[–] Sylvanas 29 points Edited

I think that that the focus on these kids being sterile is… well, to me as a childfree woman it’s not the biggest problem with these procedures.

Here are some bigger issues:

  1. A kid who takes puberty blockers, cross sex hormones and gets surgical genital alterations won’t be able to experience an orgasm. Ever. It might not be the worst thing in life for some, but it’s a very bad outcome for others. And it might affect their relationships. You can explain to a 10 year old girl “you won’t have a baby”, but how do you explain she’d never have an orgasm? Can a kid even consent to something they cannot understand?

  2. Even childfree women don’t usually get a hysterectomy. It’s not like “the snip” for men. This is a very difficult procedure that has a huge impact on the entire body and hormonal function. And the rest of your internal organs are likely to prolapse in the abdomen once the uterus is removed. Trans identified women often HAVE to get a hysterectomy after 5 years on testosterone, because it causes uterine tumours.

  3. Various other bad and scary side effects you can’t predict or understand till you experience them. Related urinary tract infections. Repeated corrective surgeries. Plenty of harsh consequences unrelated to the ability to have children.

Agreed with those points as well. The thing about sterilization that horrifies me is less the personal freedom aspect -- which is still important -- and more how it directly parallels the forcible sterilization of other populations deemed "undesirable."

Good points. I think also that they are forgetting that pro-choice goes both ways. They are removing the choice to become pregnant when the child cannot possibly consent.

Well, from your perspective it's not the biggest problem, but most people do grow up to want children, and they don't know that when they're kids, so it is a big problem- your feelings about having kids regardless! (I don't mean to offend, but I don't follow your logic).

I mean, if lesbians' s panties are considered a barrier that needs to be shredded (cotton ceiling), then I don' t see anything wrong with that!

I hesitate to use the word "evil," but Johanna Olson-Kennedy is the worst of the worst in terms of her callousness. She and her trans spouse have based their entire careers on the medical transition of young children.

These people believe they are Gods, they think they can overcome nature.

I'm okay with it if they apply this to climbing Everest or... deep sea diving or standing in a hurricane, hahaha. If they would only turn their desire to overcome nature inward....

[–] bellatrixbells No flair. 🙁 1 points

Maybe they should operate on themselves too... 😑

(Dark humor !!!!)

[–] Gwen 51 points

“A transgender male with visible breasts has a body that discloses his transgender status to others, whether he wants this information known or not,” the authors write.

Right. Because the breasts are the only clue. The fact that some of these girls are 5'2 won't tip anyone off.

small boned, narrow chin, no adam's apple, wider hips, angled femurs, narrow shoulders, and on and on and on....

[–] TransWidow Memoir Soon! 20 points

A transgender male with visible breasts has a body that discloses his transgender status to others

Actually, that discloses her female status. It's the blue hair and pronoun badge that discloses her transgender status.

[–] bellatrixbells No flair. 🙁 8 points

The fact that she throws a raging fit at anyone who questions the huge TIM in lingerie with the boner over there is also a clue.

Right. Because the breasts are the only clue. The fact that some of these girls are 5'2 won't tip anyone off.

Not to mention their Muppet voices

“Transgender male” is another deliberately confusing term. To me it means a TIM. TIFs are female.

The fucking mastectomy scars are a goddamn giveaway that they are female wtf

[–] bellatrixbells No flair. 🙁 9 points

I keep thinking about that too... Like... Do you think we don't see them ?

[–] Jade 12 points

Even if you don't consider height, look at any TIF youtuber / tiktoker "post top op" videos, and you just see a boobless woman's body. They pull up their shirts all proud like the broad hips and typically female lower-abdominal adiposity are not there.

Load more (1 comment)
[–] BlackCirce 🔮🐖🐖🐖 47 points

Writing in the prestigious journal, Archives of Sexual Behavior, Melbourne psychiatrist Alison Clayton argues that transgender mastectomy may with time be seen as “dangerous medicine” like discredited past practices such as psychiatric lobotomy, which won a Nobel prize in 1949.

It’s unethical and conceptually incoherent to treat mental disorders with surgery. If a mental disorder has such a concrete connection to a somatic structure or process that it can be adequately treated with surgery, it should moved to the speciality of that structure. “She’s upset because she has breasts, therefore removing the breasts will cure her distress” is not a valid clinical reasoning.

Psychiatrists treating gender identity are getting high on their ability to marshal the big guns: anesthesiology and surgery.

“She’s upset because she has breasts, therefore removing the breasts will cure her distress” is not a valid clinical reasoning.

Indeed. It's only a short step from that to "She's unhappy because she hates her life, so killing her will cure her depression".

Not coincidentally, the editor of Archives of Sexual Behavior is Kenneth Zucker.

Demand is rising in rich countries for this procedure, often rebadged as “top surgery” or “chest reconstruction” because even the word “breast” is seen as distressing for teenage girls and young women who want a masculine look.

If the word for a body part distresses you, you are mentally ill.

That these people are even allowed to have these self-mutilation surgeries is a crime.

If the word for a body part distresses you, you are mentally ill.

Right. Even in actual men, a breast is called a breast. Males with gynaecomastia have breasts, not "chests" or "tops" or whatever else.

[–] Sylvanas 28 points Edited

The article compares this practice to a lobotomy. But I thought of another analogy.

I’ve been reading a lot about the opioid crisis after I finished the Cobain biography. ~20-25 years ago, Purdue Pharma sent sales reps to every major clinic in the U.S., to "educate" doctors about how safe and non-addictive their opioid pain medication Oxycodone was. Doctors got free samples and reading materials, as well as invitations to medical conferences in fancy hotels.

Turns out that Oxycodone was addictive, much like other opioids in the same family. And the med was expensive, so addicts replaced it with street drugs from the same family, like heroin and later on fentanyl. This year there were 100,000 fentanyl-related deaths in the U.S. alone. It’s super easy to accidentally OD on fentanyl. This stuff is very strong and cheap to make. You never know how strong it is when you take it.

So we’re talking here about a mistake the entire medical establishment made collectively, unquestioningly, harming millions of people in the process. Purdue Pharma knew Oxy was bad, as per internal memos. They just wanted to make $$. This wasn’t 100 years ago, this industry only began to realise its mistakes in the mid 2000s. Take-home opioids aren’t as easily prescribed anymore if you’re not a terminal cancer patient. Purdue Pharma has been drowning in lawsuits for creating the opioid crisis.

I’m telling this story here because I think puberty blockers, cross sex hormones, gender reassignment surgeries etc would be the new Oxycodone. Give it one more decade. More detrans people who were disfigured by this would sue. More kids who went on Lupron and reached their 30s never experiencing an orgasm would sue. Only then a change will come.

100K- that's one hundred thousand- people OD'd last year. So even though we know about the disastrous effects of Big Pharma pushing opioids, (and allowed them to skate away with slaps on the wrist) the destruction to society is still very much ongoing...

Though granted, there will be more sympathy for detrans people in the future than there is for opioid deaths today.

I'm telling this story here because I think puberty blockers, cross sex hormones, gender reassignment surgeries etc would be the new Oxycodone.

I think you're absolutely right. In another decade or so (when today's "trans kids" hit their 30s and 40s), their bodies will REALLY start feeling the impact of the medical experimentation they endured. And the trans friendly media will no longer be able to ignore them or treat them as outliers when they're suffering from crippling health problems and/or dying in droves from it

I've actually already typed up an unpublished blog post about this very comparison.

I'd love a link once it's up!

I’m just trying to get the courage to give it to a well known blogger who fights these things. It will have my real name on it so it’s a little daunting.

[–] ProxyMusic 6 points Edited

As one of the many millions of chronic pain patients in the US who was prescribed Oxycodone, morphine, methadone and Fentanyl in massive amounts for a number of years in the early part of this century, I have to say I object to the way you are trying to liken two totally different kinds of medical scandals.

Opioids and opioid addiction don't cause double mastectomy of teen girls and young women, castration, alteration or destruction of the genitals and the sterility, permanent sexual dysfunction, permanent lack of libido and permanent absence of sexual function - and other problems like fistulas and urinary and fecal incontinence - that result from trans surgeries and trans hormone treatments.

Also, in your description of the opioid crisis, you are conflating different groups of drug users and making it appear that all or most of us prescribed opioids initially ended up using street drugs. This is BS. The vast majority of people prescribed opioids in the US, including Fentanyl, never used street drugs or black market narcotics. Most of us who were prescribed these drugs had insurance that paid for the prescriptions and we used only the drugs doled out by licensed pharmacists.

This article is about surgeries being done on teenagers and very young adults with totally healthy bodies in an attempt to ameliorate their mental health problems. The vast majority of people prescribed massive amounts of opioids during the opioid crisis were adult middle-aged and elderly chronic pain sufferers with verified physical illnesses and disabilities of a very serious nature.

I don't think it's helpful AT ALL to try to make these entirely different kinds of medical scandals seem similar. In fact, I think such efforts are harmful. Please stop. Reading a lot about the opioid crisis after reading a bio of Kurt Cobain doesn't make you an authority on these matters.

[–] Sylvanas 12 points Edited

I didn't mean to offend anyone, apologies - I'm fully aware that there are plenty of people who aren't addicts and legitimately need pain meds on a daily basis, and perhaps are suffering as a result of Purdue Pharma's pushing of these meds to those who shouldn't have been prescribed them.

I recently came across this discussion about a paralysed patient whose doctors were too afraid to prescribe more pain meds, till he committed suicide. The doctors on /r/medicine in the comments have different views on this topic, but many say they won't take pain patients at all because they can't face the legal risk. They underprescribe - risk of suicide, they overprescribe - risk of overdose, and there's always the risk of law enforcement intervention AND losing their license, if the med gets diverted to the street.

Not everyone who uses these meds is an addict, but Purdue Pharma WAS found guilty of fraud by promoting these meds to patients who shouldn't have been taking them, and sometimes ad libitum.

The equivalence here would be: Lupron is a legit drug for patients who have certain types of cancer and should not be illegalised, but pushing it onto "trans" kids is questionable. Mastectomies are medically necessary for some women with breast cancer, but performing them on 18 year old girls who say they're boys is extremely problematic.

[–] ProxyMusic 2 points Edited

I am not suggesting that you mean to cause offense. I am also not objecting to your use of the word "addict" and the suggestion that people prescribed Big Pharma opiates over time became addicts/opiate dependent.

I am objecting to the facile way you are likening very different groups of medical patients and very different kinds of medical interventions. Because I think the analogies you are drawing are not just unhelpful, but they are actively harmful to all the various groups of people you are conflating.

IMO, it's totally legit to draw an analogy between lobotomies done to "cure" a host of mental illnesses in past eras and the new practice of doing double mastectomies on teenage girls and young women to treat their "gender dysphoria" and other surgeries for "gender dysphoria" such as penile inversion, FFS, tracheal shaves, implantation of silicone sacs in the chest wall. In these cases, you are comparing different kinds of surgeries, but you are still likening surgeries done for mental health reasons to other kinds of surgeries done for mental health reasons.

But I object to the way you immediately jumped from the surgeries under discussion to prescription opiates for chronic and acute pain, and the way you are now jumping again from opioids to GnRH agonists like Lupron prescribed for various purposes...

The fact that the Big Pharma companies pushing various kinds of drugs on different populations have been found guilty of fraud or other offenses does not mean the drugs they are pushing and the populations they are victimizing are analogous.

Lupron is not the same as Oxycontin. Double mastectomy of teens is not the same as opiate use.

[–] BlackCirce 🔮🐖🐖🐖 5 points

The other overlap it has is that the patients participated in the movement and social justice concepts were exploited to justify it. The idea that pain is the fifth (or whatever number) vital sign, that there is a crisis of untreated pain (which might be true) that can be easily fixed by physicians prescribing more opioids, physicians who didn’t / don’t want to are said to (yes really this exact word) torture patients.

Yeah, no shit. This is going to be the scandal of the 21st century, certainly a very major one, right at the start. It will be in history books for a long time just like Thalidomide and lobotomies and Nazi experiments and Big Tobacco and so on already are. This will not be looked back on Kindly by future generations, at all. It will be recognized as a war on womankind, and a war on homosexuality. Because that's what it is. It will also be recognized as a mass-psychosis, and the fact that it was funded by a just a few very rich fetishistic men may not be what is most remembered about this, but I'm sure the most detailed, honest accounts of what's happening now will include that. There are receipts, after all. Books will be written, just like you can find books now about the Satanic Panic and recovered memories crazes.

It will be recognized as a war on womankind, and a war on homosexuality.

I'm cynical but I don't think this is how it's going to play out. I think it's much more likely that men in power will wash their hands of it by scapegoating women ("SJW feminists supported this!!!") and LGBs ("slippery slope!!!! if we let the homosexuals have rights this is where it leads!!!"). Too many powerful men have bought into this, and part of what made it so easy for them to buy into it is that they don't care about the impact on women and homosexuals. I don't think they're going to peacefully accept responsibility.

[–] no- 12 points

It will be recognized as a war on womankind, and a war on homosexuality.

If the trans movement has taught me something, is that no one cares about women or LGB people. A proper backlash won't happen until the straight, white, rich AGPs who rule the movement start regretting their vaginoplasties.

Personally I think the language alone is enough to raise ethical issues about informed consent. An accurate description of the procedure requires acknowledging the biological reality, and if the patient can't do that, then they're in no position to consent.

Let's not forget that children legally can't give informed consent. Only informed assent. Talk about language being a clue.

[–] Gini 🌸 Ad meliora 🦕 30 points

"may" ?

Yea I think it will definitely be judged a mistake. I just hope enough butchers and quacks who call themselves doctors lose their license and get put into jail.

[–] VestalVirgin 23 points Edited

I'm not sure that can happen.

The insanity was approved by politicians. Doctors can say they just did what they were told to do.

And the only case in history that is known to me where people were punished for following government policy was the Nuremberg Trials.

Now, imagine if one of the attempts of assassinating Hitler had succeeded, and all of Germany had collectively realized that, hey, genocide is wrong!

Would there have been any punishment?

Jesus said: "Let him who is without sin cast the first stone".

Who can cast the first stone in the case of trans insanity? Almost all political parties are complicit. If they decided that promoting trans ideology is wrong, they would have to punish themselves.

So ... I think it might be considered a mistake, but in the "Oh, that could have happened to anyone. Let's just forget it and speak of it no more" way.

Edit: Were the practicioners of lobotomy punished? That might give us a clue on what to expect ...

[–] BlackCirce 🔮🐖🐖🐖 27 points

I’m pretty sure that’s exactly what will happen. It was all a big mistake let’s never talk about it again bestie

[–] Sylvanas 7 points Edited

Who can cast the first stone in the case of trans insanity? Almost all political parties are complicit.

This hurts because the article quotes Adam Bandt of The Green Party in Australia. I’m a registered member of this party and have been voting for them, because of their stand on climate change (Australia suffered devastating fires in 2019, which were linked to the climate crisis. We all breathed filthy smoke every day for 2.5 months).

But the Greens also want to mutilate the genitals of teens, so now I have no political home. I have nobody to vote for. No representation.

[–] bellatrixbells No flair. 🙁 2 points

I feel you. We're lucky enough not to have dealt with devastating events yet, but the Canadian Green Party has also gone full woke. 😠

[–] Riothamus scrote 22 points

One person's "mistake" is another's "crime against humanity".

Not future generations. We are saying it right now. It's a huge mistake.

Some have said it for years. Some have said it for decades. It has always been a last resort, experimental, palliative treatment.

Load more (8 comments)