74

They invest so much in their transition, and make highly detailed videos about what they've experienced. But try debating with any of them and it quickly becomes apparent to me that they have a very superficial understanding of what they are doing. They can basically only recite the bullet points on the informed consent forms but they don't know what any of it means. Common things I've seen:

  1. Poor understanding of research. "We don't have any research to say that it DOES harm you!" First of all, we do, but even if we didn't, that's not evidence that wrecking your hormones is a safe thing to do. Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.

  2. A belief that unethical doctors are extremely rare, and CERTAINLY never found in the transgender healthcare field! Even if they do acknowledge bad ethics en masse, they view it as historical atrocity. Or, they act like the opioid crisis and transition treatments don't come from the same field.

  3. Very vague knowledge of what hormones do. They know how hormones can change appearance but don't know what else they do for the body.

  4. Baaaaarely wikipedia level of understanding of DSDs.

  5. They think individual features all come together so that they will pass. "Some men are short." "Some men have big butts." "Some men don't grow much facial hair." They don't realize that individual features don't overrule the entire presentation. Humans can easily tell the difference between a short man and a tall woman. And there's a recitation vibe to it- like they are repeating what doctors have told them. It feels like these doctors are trying to convince TIFs that if they retain very female features, they will still pass.

  6. Early hysterectomies and the link to dementia is always news to them. "I have NEVER heard that." That's their dismissal, too, to imply that you're a nut with weird beliefs.

Maybe detransitioners can weigh in, here. But I just don't think doctors do a thorough job, helping their patients fully understand their new medications. Isaac, a detrans TIM, recorded his therapist being glib and shady. I know that's just his therapist and not his doctor. But combined with the way TIFs discuss this online, it seems like doctors in the gender business don't fully inform. As a habit. Dr. Gallagher feigns transparency by talking about her surgical techniques- "wee little chonkies-" but does she talk about dementia?

They invest so much in their transition, and make highly detailed videos about what they've experienced. But try debating with any of them and it quickly becomes apparent to me that they have a very superficial understanding of what they are doing. They can basically only recite the bullet points on the informed consent forms but they don't know what any of it means. Common things I've seen: 1. Poor understanding of research. "We don't have any research to say that it DOES harm you!" First of all, we do, but even if we didn't, that's not evidence that wrecking your hormones is a safe thing to do. Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. 2. A belief that unethical doctors are extremely rare, and CERTAINLY never found in the transgender healthcare field! Even if they do acknowledge bad ethics en masse, they view it as historical atrocity. Or, they act like the opioid crisis and transition treatments don't come from the same field. 3. Very vague knowledge of what hormones do. They know how hormones can change appearance but don't know what else they do for the body. 4. Baaaaarely wikipedia level of understanding of DSDs. 5. They think individual features all come together so that they will pass. "Some men are short." "Some men have big butts." "Some men don't grow much facial hair." They don't realize that individual features don't overrule the entire presentation. Humans can easily tell the difference between a short man and a tall woman. And there's a recitation vibe to it- like they are repeating what doctors have told them. It feels like these doctors are trying to convince TIFs that if they retain very female features, they will still pass. 6. Early hysterectomies and the link to dementia is always news to them. "I have NEVER heard that." That's their dismissal, too, to imply that you're a nut with weird beliefs. Maybe detransitioners can weigh in, here. But I just don't think doctors do a thorough job, helping their patients fully understand their new medications. Isaac, a detrans TIM, recorded his therapist being glib and shady. I know that's just his therapist and not his doctor. But combined with the way TIFs discuss this online, it seems like doctors in the gender business don't fully inform. As a habit. Dr. Gallagher feigns transparency by talking about her surgical techniques- "wee little chonkies-" but does she talk about dementia?

42 comments

Everyone has made some good points here. I wonder though if there's something at play here about female socialization and medicine.

You see it elsewhere, I think, maybe not to the same extent. But I was shocked at how many women just go with what their OB (and later paediatrician) says - like, yes, let's induce a primagravida at 39 weeks for no reason except the ARRIVE trial! Oops, she wasn't ready and it turned into an "emergency" c section - phew, thank heavens the OB was there!! When they probably could have politely declined and had a non traumatic labour at 41+5 or whatever is average for a first timer, perfectly fine. But no, OB is handing down the Gospel and should be obeyed without question, and the fact that inducing a primagravida raises her risk of caesarean by 50% isn't widely known.

I just tried reading up on the ARRIVE trial and the first hit was an article where the first paragraph discusses which “people” were eligible for the trial, without mentioning the words “women”, “pregnant” or “mother” even once! (A site called Evidence based birth).

Oh that site. Yes, fully given to the gender woo. If aliens were reading the web trying to understand humans, they would really struggle to work out how we reproduce, I think!