US Government rules on Gender Identity

Moderators: DrVolin, 82_28, Elvis, Jeff

Re: US Government rules on Gender Identity

Postby Heaven Swan » Tue Jul 10, 2018 6:31 am

Elvis » Sun Jul 08, 2018 7:23 pm wrote:This all hit home for me recently. My mid-20s niece, a fantastic young woman I love and admire, apparently wants to change her name to a male name and be considered male. She didn't mention anything when I saw her very recently, but her parents have described these wishes to me. None of us can really "see" her as male, or make an immediate internal adjustment to the idea, since we all know her as a healthy, attractive, smart, responsible and 'together' young woman. But as such, she should be capable of making such decisions for good reasons. Interestingly, her father (my brother) is gay, in a gay (second) marriage, and he thinks it's silly, but will go along if she insists.

Thoughts? I'll roll with it, but I hope I don't have to learn and use new pronouns to address, um...her.



Dress up, fashon, cross-dressing = lots of fun, possible spiritual and emotional growth and healing, and harmless in the long term

Injecting testosterone and sexual reassignment surgeries = irreversible body changes, lots of potential and likely health problems,, becoming a lifelong medical patient/consumer, shortened life span.

If you want to be a caring, helpful and possibly life-saving uncle you could spend some time researching the health effects and be sure she knows that many of the changes brought on by testosterone injections are irreversible. Some depend on the length of use but the change to the voice and vocal cords happens very quickly and is irreversible.

Take a look at this update on the class action lawsuit involving thousands of male plaintiffs who suffered life threatening health problems such as deep vein thrombosis, heart attack, stroke and death from testosterone supplementation. Make sure she knows that the dosages given to men are extremely low in comparison to the high dosages given to women (generally by an injection in the buttock every other week). A high dosage is needed to radically change the body of a female (beard growth, male pattern baldness, muscle growth...)

Quote from the linked page:

“A recent and alarming study has revealed that men who take popularly prescribed testosterone are at a 30% increased risk of having a heart attack, stroke or experiencing death -- according to a study published in the Journal of the American Medical Association.”

https://www.gblawyers.com/testosterone- ... E8QAvD_BwE

You’d assume that before prescribing testosterone the women would be advised of the irreversible changes and health risks, but this is not always the case. I lived with a trans man and she was not notified.

There is some good info and links in Guruilla’s post above. Even though your niece is not technically a child, she’s still a vulnerable young person. The website 4th Wave Now, started by parents concerned about their children is a major resource,

I wish you the best on this and hope she’s going to get through this without major health consequences.
"Bow to your oppressor and you will be destroyed. Dare to fight and you will liberate the world."
User avatar
Heaven Swan
 
Posts: 525
Joined: Thu Feb 20, 2014 7:22 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: US Government rules on Gender Identity

Postby Elvis » Tue Jul 10, 2018 8:12 am

Thanks, Heaven Swan :thumbsup
"Frankly, I don't think it's a good idea but the sums proposed are enormous."
User avatar
Elvis
 
Posts: 5451
Joined: Fri Apr 11, 2008 7:24 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: US Government rules on Gender Identity

Postby Heaven Swan » Wed Jul 11, 2018 9:40 am

My bolding

liminalOyster » Mon Jul 09, 2018 6:44 pm wrote:
Sounder » Mon Jul 09, 2018 6:03 pm wrote:I'm sure people here fully support Trans and non gender binary folk, but a question remains as to whether these folk and others are being 'used' to achieve bad intentions.


I think there are intriguing thoughts in that line of inquiry. IE, as Heaven Swan points out, that it may be less so "conservative" than (very ironically) Marxist to defend "the family," if that forestalls further encroachment by various PTB. I'm definitely sympathetic to the more general idea that the proliferation of sex/gender identities prefigures the reterritorialization of bodies by nefarious forces. But OTOH, I sometimes wonder if that hypothesis is terribly different than the evangelical right's old "homosexual agenda" chestnut.

I've never been a fan of calling anyone a sheeple or presuming their motives and I see a tremendous amount of that and whole lot of just cruelty on that site. Lots of referring to "men in dresses" with mental illness, etc. I just find it mean and myopic and that it, for me at least, obscures respectful and intelligent opposition to the dominant discourses of trans-mainstreaming.


I think we can all agree that no one should judge a movement by the comment section of one blog.

Also, I°d like to know why you are so upset about references to °men in dresses° and mental illness (and btw autgynephilia is listed in the DSM IV as a mental illness and I'm posting the reference below) and you°re not concerned about the avalanche of death and rape threats against feminists by trans, samples of which were posted upthread.

viewtopic.php?f=8&t=40036&start=15#p612488

Ok, women are not behaving as they should, i.e. smiling and being supportive to men in all things. Are you also upset about political cartoons and Stephen Colbert’s jokes about Trump?

Seriously, you may not know it, but your attitude is widespread in trans claims that speech is violence. Then they erase or defend actual violence.



*
Transvestic Disorder DSM-5 302.3 (F65.1): Symptoms, Treatments
Transvestic disorder is categorized as a paraphilic disorder in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fifth Edition (DSM-5), and characterized by the sexual excitement individuals experience when they cross-dress or think about cross-dressing. Men with trasnvestic disorder typically have autogynephilia as well, or the tendency to become sexually aroused when imagining himself as a woman. The fantasies that accompany autogynephilia can focus on either the idea of having female physiological functions (e.g., menstruation), engaging in stereotypical feminine behavior (e.g., wearing pink, sewing, etc.), or having female anatomy (e.g., breasts).

Diagnostic Criteria and Specifications

There are multiple criteria an individual must meet in order for a transvestic disorder diagnosis to be completed:
The individual experiences intense sexual arousal from cross-dressing, as manifested by fantasies, urges, or acts, for at least 6 months.
These fantasies, urges, and acts cause clinically significant distress or impairment in social, occupational, or other important areas of life.
"Bow to your oppressor and you will be destroyed. Dare to fight and you will liberate the world."
User avatar
Heaven Swan
 
Posts: 525
Joined: Thu Feb 20, 2014 7:22 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: US Government rules on Gender Identity

Postby Iamwhomiam » Wed Jul 11, 2018 11:36 am

Ah, the DSM, the original label maker.
User avatar
Iamwhomiam
 
Posts: 5759
Joined: Thu Sep 27, 2007 2:47 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: US Government rules on Gender Identity

Postby Iamwhomiam » Wed Jul 11, 2018 12:40 pm

I've set into bold typeface the particular portions of Heaven Swan's remarks I'll be addressing. I've also added the url tags to his link. "His" because I do not know HS' sex or personal, self-defined sexual disposition.
Heaven Swan » Tue Jul 10, 2018 6:31 am wrote:
Elvis » Sun Jul 08, 2018 7:23 pm wrote:This all hit home for me recently. My mid-20s niece, a fantastic young woman I love and admire, apparently wants to change her name to a male name and be considered male. She didn't mention anything when I saw her very recently, but her parents have described these wishes to me. None of us can really "see" her as male, or make an immediate internal adjustment to the idea, since we all know her as a healthy, attractive, smart, responsible and 'together' young woman. But as such, she should be capable of making such decisions for good reasons. Interestingly, her father (my brother) is gay, in a gay (second) marriage, and he thinks it's silly, but will go along if she insists.

Thoughts? I'll roll with it, but I hope I don't have to learn and use new pronouns to address, um...her.



Dress up, fashon, cross-dressing = lots of fun, possible spiritual and emotional growth and healing, and harmless in the long term

Injecting testosterone and sexual reassignment surgeries = irreversible body changes, lots of potential and likely health problems,, becoming a lifelong medical patient/consumer, shortened life span.

If you want to be a caring, helpful and possibly life-saving uncle you could spend some time researching the health effects and be sure she knows that many of the changes brought on by testosterone injections are irreversible. Some depend on the length of use but the change to the voice and vocal cords happens very quickly and is irreversible.

Take a look at this update on the class action lawsuit involving thousands of male plaintiffs who suffered life threatening health problems such as deep vein thrombosis, heart attack, stroke and death from testosterone supplementation. Make sure she knows that the dosages given to men are extremely low in comparison to the high dosages given to women (generally by an injection in the buttock every other week). A high dosage is needed to radically change the body of a female (beard growth, male pattern baldness, muscle growth...)

Quote from the linked page:

“A recent and alarming study has revealed that men who take popularly prescribed testosterone are at a 30% increased risk of having a heart attack, stroke or experiencing death -- according to a study published in the Journal of the American Medical Association.”

https://www.gblawyers.com/testosterone-lawsuits/?gclid=CjwKCAjwspHaBRBFEiwA0eM3kQXrFUfoD7qNRd3Cq3pXa4pfQ85SvsnUKdwjcfejzKDbqBogqMI43RoCxE8QAvD_BwE

You’d assume that before prescribing testosterone the women would be advised of the irreversible changes and health risks, but this is not always the case. I lived with a trans man and she was not notified.

There is some good info and links in Guruilla’s post above. Even though your niece is not technically a child, she’s still a vulnerable young person. The website 4th Wave Now, started by parents concerned about their children is a major resource,

I wish you the best on this and hope she’s going to get through this without major health consequences.


First, to address Heaven Swan's suggestion to Elvis, about what he should do to be a helpful and caring uncle to his niece: To be a caring and loving uncle all Elvis need do is to love and support his niece, no matter her decision. It is a bit much to lay on Elvis his niece's future health has any bearing whatsoever on any advice he should think to offer her in this matter. What she needs, like most of us, is unconditional love and support from her family. That's not to say Elvis, or any immediate family member cannot honestly express their feelings about this young woman's choice to explore malehood in any way she might choose to.

Also, it is not Elvis' role to be his niece's health educator. Advise her to become informed, to seek out the most knowledgeable on transition, perhaps.

Your link is to an ambulance chaser's advertisement seeking to build a class action suit's number of litigants and in no way does it reflects any knowledge whatsoever upon the health impacts testosterone may or may not have upon women who take testosterone for any reason, not even those hetero women who use this male hormone, a steroid, to enhance their sexual experience. The "study" (so many are mentioned, though none are linked to) has to do with hetero men like my friend who had became depressed after his married son with two young children, an infant and a three year-old, became a junkie and ripped off his inlaws and lost his job. His wife was also entering menopause. For him it was pick-me-up. (Additionally, this guy has the maximum steroidal injections each year to allieviate back pain, four a year, so as not to damage his liver, though these are not testosterone.)

Please, if you're going to offer advice, be informed of the true content you base your advise upon. Don't post here crap that might be more suited to the Rense crowd please, and assume it is authoritive enough to guilt another poster who's related a rather awkward situation he's dealing with, that him giving wrong advise to a loved one could be fatally consequential to them.

On edit: I forgot to add this tidbit: I first learned of Christine Jorgensen when I was 17 and hospitalized with double pneumonia. I was in a ward with and with me was another young man who happened to be Christine Jorgensen's next door neighbor. I still remember his name and ailment, osteogenesis imperfecta more commonly known as brittle-bone disease.

Christine Jorgensen lived a life shortened by bladder and lung cancer and died shortly before her 63rd birthday.

2nd edit to correct typo: whose to who's
Last edited by Iamwhomiam on Wed Jul 11, 2018 4:17 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
Iamwhomiam
 
Posts: 5759
Joined: Thu Sep 27, 2007 2:47 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: US Government rules on Gender Identity

Postby Heaven Swan » Wed Jul 11, 2018 2:16 pm

Don’t like the source of those warnings about synthetic testosterone?

Here are recently revised warnings straight from the FDA:

https://www.fda.gov/Drugs/DrugSafety/ucm436259.htm

https://www.fda.gov/Drugs/DrugSafety/ucm526206.htm

These refer to males but science and common sense dictate that females bodies are not designed to handle high levels of testosterone.
"Bow to your oppressor and you will be destroyed. Dare to fight and you will liberate the world."
User avatar
Heaven Swan
 
Posts: 525
Joined: Thu Feb 20, 2014 7:22 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: US Government rules on Gender Identity

Postby Iamwhomiam » Wed Jul 11, 2018 4:39 pm

Heaven Swan » Wed Jul 11, 2018 2:16 pm wrote:Don’t like the source of those warnings about synthetic testosterone?

Here are recently revised warnings straight from the FDA:

https://www.fda.gov/Drugs/DrugSafety/ucm436259.htm

https://www.fda.gov/Drugs/DrugSafety/ucm526206.htm

These refer to males but science and common sense dictate that females bodies are not designed to handle high levels of testosterone.


"Don’t like the source of those warnings about synthetic testosterone?"

Seriously, Heaven Swan, out of all I wrote, this is what you ask me, being someone who has in the past loaded up on steroids for years on end to allieviate the excruciating pain from a severely broken back, someone who's been an EMT and through nursing school?

It's very odd for me to read, in this thread especially, "that science and common sense dictate that females bodies are not designed to handle high levels of testosterone." Have you forgotten, we start out as sex-undefined fetuses whereupon testosterone and estrogen work their magic, spitting us out as "Boy" or "Girl" and once in awhile, a few who's sex is indeterminable, as they have the sex organs of both. Silly to say our bodies do not cope with hormones of the opposite sex, as both sexes produce both male and female hormones.

It seems my testosterone if fading with age; at least that's what my newly acquired man-boobs are telling me.

But more to the point, if you really want to advise Elvis to protect his niece, wouldn't it be better to suggest to him he advise her to avoid riding in automobiles? Odds n' all?
User avatar
Iamwhomiam
 
Posts: 5759
Joined: Thu Sep 27, 2007 2:47 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: US Government rules on Gender Identity

Postby Elvis » Wed Jul 11, 2018 5:45 pm

Image

Lights, but no siren, no warning sent. I just want to ask you, Heaven Swan—and of course this goes for everyone—not to insinuate misogyny on the part of other posters, and not to suggest they don't care about threats made against transexuals, or accuse them of patriarchy, when they're making a good faith effort to reasonably discuss this difficult issue.

I know you don't intend to start a flame war, but such sharply pointed assumptions or insinuations can be quite off-putting and things can quickly go downhill. We can find other ways of raising the implications of a given line of thought, e.g. keeping it neutral in a third-person context.

We've received some objections to some data and sources on this topic; the moderators are unlikely to block contested data, as that should be worked out in a rigorous discussion, sans personal jabs.

Overall, it's an excellent discussion, let's keep it so. :thumbsup
"Frankly, I don't think it's a good idea but the sums proposed are enormous."
User avatar
Elvis
 
Posts: 5451
Joined: Fri Apr 11, 2008 7:24 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: US Government rules on Gender Identity

Postby Heaven Swan » Thu Jul 12, 2018 8:00 am

My, my, aren't we touchy.

If it came off that I was pointing the finger at LO that's not what I meant and I sent a PM to him to clarify.

No. it would make no sense for me to launch accusations of misogyny over trifles. If anyone is misogynist, they know it, and they can deal, or not deal with it on their own. And I assume good will and operate on the idea that there is a living breathing human behind every screen name and truly don't want to hurt or offend anyone.

And IamwhoIam---you said initially that you were talking about "a friend" so there's no way I could have known that you were actually referring to yourself. It sounds like you were in serious car accident and for that I'm very sorry and hope you've healed by now. I harbor no ill will towards you, on the contrary, but the thread is about Gender Identity and I was addressing that. I separate you as a person from any things I might disagree with you on and I hope you can do the same towards me. Thank you.

I think, from my part, what may have caused some misunderstanding is something I mentioned earlier--a tendency to respond to one post by one person but have several or many other similar opinions in mind. Liminal Oyster has always been decent and even-handed and I haven't had any problem whatsoever with how he's expressed himself, and everyone has a right to express their opinions. This is a discussion board and if everyone agreed there would be no discussion.

I am very sad though about some personal issues, and flowing into the enormous river of grief I'm feeling is a small stream of sorrow about the left.

I have been a lifelong leftist. In the early days I embraced the cause of defending and fighting for the people: the workers, the poor and the downtrodden, in the spirit of Jesus or St Francis. Thanks to some abusive priests and other disagreements I'm not Christian but I truly believed in the left and to see the state of it today causes me pain and grief.

This Is a general thing, not pertaining to any one person here and goes way beyond this message board. But here I've gotten a strange and direct taste of this conflict which troubles me. Here there are quite a few posters who seem to be "wild cards' and don't strongly embrace left nor right, and everyone here, thanks to their interest in deep state conspiracies, has a certain open-mindedness, but many posters seem to clearly identify themselves as left/liberal or right/conservative.

It has been hard for me to see that basically only the wild cards and the right/conservative posters have expressed any empathy or support for me and the radical feminists on issue covered in this thread. I really thought that if they were exposed to the facts, and if I explained well enough what was going on, my leftist brothers would care about threats and violent attacks on feminists.

I will never align myself with the right since I disagree with with most of their basic premises, but this sort of behavior by liberal/leftists has been a wake up call. And if it seemed that I was pointing the finger at any one leftist poster here it may have been coming from the general sadness and grief I'm feeling, and isn't really about any one person here or elsewhere.

I hope that what I have written is clear, and thanks to everyone for engaging on this thread which for me has been fruitful.



Elvis » Wed Jul 11, 2018 5:45 pm wrote:Image

Lights, but no siren, no warning sent. I just want to ask you, Heaven Swan—and of course this goes for everyone—not to insinuate misogyny on the part of other posters, and not to suggest they don't care about threats made against transexuals, or accuse them of patriarchy, when they're making a good faith effort to reasonably discuss this difficult issue.

I know you don't intend to start a flame war, but such sharply pointed assumptions or insinuations can be quite off-putting and things can quickly go downhill. We can find other ways of raising the implications of a given line of thought, e.g. keeping it neutral in a third-person context.

We've received some objections to some data and sources on this topic; the moderators are unlikely to block contested data, as that should be worked out in a rigorous discussion, sans personal jabs.

Overall, it's an excellent discussion, let's keep it so. :thumbsup
"Bow to your oppressor and you will be destroyed. Dare to fight and you will liberate the world."
User avatar
Heaven Swan
 
Posts: 525
Joined: Thu Feb 20, 2014 7:22 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: US Government rules on Gender Identity

Postby liminalOyster » Thu Jul 12, 2018 11:31 am

Hi Heaven. Thanks for the note. No big deal but I appreciate the thoughtfulness. Actually, I'm an anarchist (and one who is happy to find commonality with the libertarians many on the left revile) and not a Leftist in any traditional 20thc sense. And, FWIW, I think the basic idea that oppression of women first stemmed from the male imperialism of women's bodies and was based on controlling the means of (human) (re)production and so we should be extremely careful in how we talk/theorize sex/gender, is an extremely critical insight that many on the Left would do well to pay more serious attention to.

And I do worry about some potetntially dangerous aspects of trans mainstreaming on both sides - there is risk involved in hormone treatment and surgery and there is tremendous risk to trans people of violence and discrimination - but above and beyond all else, I just loathe cruelty. And, perhaps it's due to a bias, but it is genuine, I have seen a lot of a kind of low-blow underhanded nastiness towards trans people (albeit mostly MTF) among some so-called RadFems that, IME/IMO, looks almost identical to the way that trans people have historically been mocked in the culture at large.

I realize that I most likely have a base "disagreement" with you. But my concern here is definitely not with women failing to follow socially expected roles, as I read you implying. And pointing out that, again IMO, it's cruel to refer to trans people as men in dresses or mentally ill doesn't have anything to do with also condemning threats of rape and violence. I see evidence here of trans people and allies behaving very badly but I also see how, in this time, everyone is trying to flip the script on each other. IE in the Jezebel piece I posted, I don't think the banned tweeter's so-called incendiary comment would ever reasonably be read as a physical threat, were it not for a larger shadow narrative propagated in places like Gender Trender. I can respect that you see this differently. But I can't change what I see, for all I try to look clearly and widely at different people, places, perspectives.

In any case, I'm a white "cis" mostly straight guy and it's not my business to make any big statements about any of this. I just don't like nastiness.

Cheers.

ps. There is essentially noone on the "Left" right now I can stomach but I will say that I picked up Naomi Klein's new book this week and have found it reassuring for its cogency.
"If you support factions that get big money backing, you are probably not a 'revolutionary'."
User avatar
liminalOyster
 
Posts: 952
Joined: Thu May 05, 2016 10:28 pm
Location: The Tropic of Fancy
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: US Government rules on Gender Identity

Postby guruilla » Thu Jul 12, 2018 12:34 pm

The ​Myth of the "Desistance Myth"
by Julian Vigo July 2nd, 2018
Gender dysphoric children who are treated using a “watchful waiting” [Zucker's] approach largely desist, no longer identify as transgender as adults, and accept their bodies as they are. Those who are subjected to medical intervention do not.

.....

Building a False Narrative

Desistance has been at the center of the transgender advocates’ fight to have transgender identity publicly accepted as an urgent medical condition. At the same time, these same advocates have pressured clinicians to remove the stigma of its psychiatric diagnosis in order to create a social acceptance of the idea that “gender” is truly biological and that “sex” is a social construct. Stunningly anti-scientific rhetoric like this is taking as its hostage the bodies and lives of children in order to prove the point that children are “born transgender.” This assertion is a self-fulfilling prophecy involving a domino effect of parents and clinicians who are effectively engaging in Munchausen  syndrome by proxy  (MSbP).

This new article isn’t the first one to question high rates of desistance. In 2016, transgender advocate Brynn Tannehill wrote in the Huffington Post about the “desistance myth,” attempting to discredit a dozen studies that demonstrate that a majority of children identifying as transgender cease do to so as they enter adulthood. Tannehill believes that desistance is a fiction “built upon bad statistics, bad science, homophobia and transphobia.” Yet Tannehill never defines these terms, nor does she validate these accusations with any proof. Even so, this false narrative—that desistance is a myth—has become part of the transgender lobby’s push to medicalize gender non-conforming children.

Transgender discourse advances the notion of the “true transgender” by accepting all the signs of gender non-conformity as unmistakable signs of being transgender—at least until they cease. Then, suddenly, people like Tannehill dismiss the child’s gender non-conformity, claiming that these trans-identifying children were never really transgender in the first place. Why do they care so much? Well, if the child desists and is allowed to accept his or her sexed body, this poses a threat to the trans narrative, especially since no single human ever conforms to all the gender stereotypes of either sex. In short, everyone is gender non-binary and potentially a candidate for a transgender diagnosis.

Tannehill’s claims about desistance are steeped in cherry-picked studies that constantly shift the goalposts of diagnostic measurement. The first assertion is that previous research did not differentiate between children with persistent gender dysphoria who socially transitioned and, as Tannehill states, those “kids who just acted more masculine or feminine than their birth sex and culture allowed for.” While Tannehill is correct in making this observation, the problem is that, as I later demonstrate, one of the diagnostic factors in gender dysphoria is acting more masculine or feminine than the subject’s birth sex.

This critique refers to a qualitative 2011 study by Thomas Steensma which concludes that 84 percent of children desist. Tannehill then goes on to cite Steensma’s quantitative follow-up study published in 2013, claiming that it contradicts this finding. It doesn’t. Steensma’s later study merely shows that the “intensity of early [gender dysphoria] appears to be an important predictor of persistence of [gender dysphoria].”

Then, Tannehill tries to undermine Steensma’s study due to the inclusion of twenty-eight non-responders in the desistance group for follow-up interviews. In fact, the study assumed that this group were all desisters for clear and cogent reasons and states so quite clearly. Nothing was hidden. Tannehill is also incorrect in asserting that the number of gender dysphoric children was never known in the Dutch study. This was not only a known quantity, but it was well documented using the then-current diagnostic criteria.

Other critics of Steensma’s study have since rescinded their claims. New York Magazine writer Jesse Singal, for example, wrote a correction to his 2016 piece on desistance in Medium earlier this spring, rectifying his earlier misinterpretation of the Steensma’s study.

Watchful Waiting

When it comes to the diagnoses and treatment of children with gender dysphoria, there are two fundamentally different approaches: transgender-affirmation and non-intervention.

Diane Ehrensaft, Director of Mental Health at San Francisco’s Child and Adolescent Gender Center, advocates the transgender-affirmative approach, all the while downplaying the effects of puberty suppression, even the cost of sterilizing children. She contends that children as young as one year of age are capable of announcing they are transgender, even before they can speak. Ehrensaft gives the following examples of transgender identification in small children: a toddler ripping out her barrettes, a one-year-old girl saying “I boy,” or a one-year-old unsnapping his onesies. Even without any specialist training, the ludicrous nature of such interpretations is immediately apparent. Yet Ehrensaft is uncritically praised in liberal media.

Non-intervention or “watchful waiting” is the more moderate—yet somehow controversial—approach that Kenneth Zucker upholds. His view is that most cases of childhood gender dysphoria will resolve themselves over time. His approach aims at helping children feel comfortable in their own bodies. However, many transgender activists view Zucker’s “watch and wait” approach as a form of gatekeeping the true transgender child.

Zucker’s approach is the prevailing standard of care in countries like the United Kingdom and Australia. It allows the child to avoid a lifetime of medicalizing the body (accompanied by sterilization and other health complications). However, the American Psychological Association (APA) and the World Professional Association for Transgender Health (WPATH) have turned the tables here. The non-interventionist approach is now framed by these two organizations as an intervention that pushes the child toward suicide and stigmatization.
The 2011 WPATH Standards of Care states that:

Refusing timely medical interventions for adolescents might prolong gender dysphoria and contribute to an appearance that could provoke abuse and stigmatization. As the level of gender-related abuse is strongly associated with the degree of psychiatric distress during adolescence (Nuttbrock et al., 2010), withholding puberty suppression and subsequent feminizing or masculinizing hormone therapy is not a neutral option for adolescents.

Just as Zucker has been attacked for allegedly engaging in conversion therapy and abuse of children by allowing them the time and space to desist, the APA and WPATH have framed “watchful waiting” and desistance as “withholding treatment.” Both organizations maintain that there is no preferred outcome and that prolonging the medicalization of the body is to behave unethically. Yet these two professional associations still push gender dysphoric children toward persistence by framing anything but trans-affirmation as “harm.”

Zucker is not alone in questioning the medical transition of children before or during puberty. In the UK, Dr Bernadette Wren, consultant clinical psychologist at the Gender Identity Development Service (GIDS) at the Tavistock Centre in London, urges caution in rushing a child through medical transition at younger ages than ever before:

There is increasing concern about puberty suppression and the risks and uncertain outcomes. They may affect gender identity development by increasing the likelihood of persistence. We don’t know the long-term effects on cognitive development, sex organ development and so on.

And Polly Carmichael, Director of the Gender Identity Development Service Director, states that parents should be engaged in “affirming without confirming” which translates to the “watchful waiting” approach that the GIDS recommends.

The Effect of Childhood “Transgender-Affirmation”

The pressure put on doctors by the transgender lobby to pursue the transgender-affirmative approach is having serious, harmful effects on children. As one UK-based parents organization, TransgenderTrend, explains:

Daily affirmation by trusted adults that a boy is really a girl (or vice versa) is likely to have a self-fulfilling effect and create persistence of a child’s belief, as children believe what adults tell them. The created fear of a puberty the child now believes to be the “wrong” one creates the need for puberty blockers.

Medical professionals such as Sahar Sadjadi, a physician and anthropologist, have expressed concerns regarding the growing use of puberty suppression treatments in children diagnosed with gender dysphoria. These children are offered Gonadotropin Releasing Hormone (GnRH) agonists (puberty blockers) at the pre-pubertal stage (ages nine to thirteen) to suppress puberty as the first step in transitioning to the desired sex. Many children are also receiving cross-sex steroid hormones at ages fourteen to sixteen as well. Some practitioners such as Johanna Olson-Kennedy start cross-sex hormones on children as young as twelve years of age. Yet there has been no long-term testing to determine the potential dangers of both hormone blockers and cross-sex hormones on young bodies.

The caution over medical transitioning of children is justified. There is demonstrable evidence that children who are put on puberty blockers do not desist. London’s GIDS clinic reports that persistence is

correlated with the commencement of physical interventions such as the hypothalamic blocker (t=.395, p=.007) and no patient within the sample desisted after having started on the hypothalamic blocker. 90.3% of young people who did not commence the blocker desisted.


Another 2010 Dutch study showed that 100% of the children put on puberty blockers went on to receive cross-sex hormone treatment. And while the numbers vary, there is a general consensus among the various studies that anywhere between 60 and 90 percent of children with gender dysphoria who receive no medical interventions desist when they reach adulthood.

In short, children who are treated using a “watchful waiting” approach largely desist, no longer identify as transgender, and accept their bodies. Those who are subjected to medical intervention do not.

It’s No Myth

The evidence is clear: the “desistance myth” is no myth. The consistent findings about gender-dysphoria desistance are real, to the chagrin of the more militant transgender advocates. When the evidence is studied, it is clear that the dissemination of the “desistance myth” is an attempt to render scientific truths fictional. It also works to de-emphasize the dangers of social transition that pushes the use of puberty blockers and cross-sex hormones.

The larger question is this: will we continue to make children pay for the identity experiments of adults while vilifying researchers like Kenneth Zucker?

There comes a point when we must accept scientific facts—or face the consequences.

Julian Vigo is a scholar, film-maker, and human rights consultant. Her latest book is Earthquake in Haiti: The Pornography of Poverty and the Politics of Development (2015). She can be reached at: julian.vigo@gmail.com

http://www.thepublicdiscourse.com/2018/07/21972/


“Intellectual no-platforming”: Ken Zucker pushes back on the latest attempt to discredit desistance-persistence research
Posted on May 30, 2018
https://4thwavenow.com/2018/05/30/intel ... -research/
by Marie Verite and Brie Jontry

Dr. Kenneth Zucker, recognized as one of the world’s top experts in childhood gender dysphoria, penned the following paper (released today).

Zucker, K. J. (2018). The myth of persistence: Response to “A Critical Commentary on Follow-Up Studies and “Desistance” Theories about Transgender and Gender Non-Conforming Children” by Temple Newhook et al. (2018). International Journal of Transgenderism. https://doi.org/10.1080/15532739.2018.1468293

Dr. Zucker has offered to provide a PDF of the full-text article if readers contact him via email.

Multiple trans-activist journalists and “affirmative” gender clinicians have (rather successfully) propagated the meme that desistance from a trans identity is a “myth”; that Zucker (former director of the Toronto clinic), Thomas Steensma, Peggy Cohen-Kettenis (of the Amsterdam team which pioneered the use of puberty blockers for gender-dysphoric children), and others have wrongly conflated merely gender nonconforming children with “true trans” kids. Therefore, their entire body of research is essentially worthless. These critics have gone further, accusing some clinicians (like Zucker) of forcing harmful reparative therapy on “trans kids.”

Dr. Zucker’s detailed rebuttal to the Temple-Newhook et al article is well worth reading in its entirety. Be forewarned: The paper is densely argued and referenced, such that understanding it requires a decent working knowledge of the clinical literature on childhood gender dysphoria, the nuances/changes in the DSM diagnostic classifications (e.g., DSM-IV “gender identity disorder” vs. DSM-V “gender dysphoria”), as well as the trans-activist reactions to all of the above.

Thus, I would hypothesize that when more follow-up data of children who socially transition prior to puberty become available, the persistence rate will be extremely high. This is not a value judgment – it is simply an empirical prediction. Just like Temple Newhook et al. (2018) argue that some of the children in the four follow-up studies included those who may have received treatment “to lower the odds” of persistence, I would argue that parents who support, implement, or encourage a gender social transition (and clinicians who recommend one) are implementing a psychosocial treatment that will increase the odds of long-term persistence.

And later, on page 10:

Temple Newhook et al. (2018) go on to state that “It is important to acknowledge that discouraging social transition [with reference to the Dutch team’s putative therapeutic approach] is itself an intervention with the potential to impact research findings…” Fair enough. But Temple Newhook et al. (2018) curiously suppress the inverse: encouraging social transition is itself an intervention with the potential to impact findings. I find this omission astonishing.

An astonishing omission, indeed.

As regular readers of this website will know, most parents in the 4thWaveNow community are particularly concerned about the recent increase in teens (particularly females) presenting to gender clinics, with a sudden onset of gender dysphoria around the age of puberty.

Although the characteristics and clinical course of early-onset gender dysphoria (the primary population discussed in Zucker’s paper) are different from that of adolescent-onset, an underlying question pertains to both: Does “affirmative” treatment increase the likelihood that a cross-sex identification will persist?

We must point out here that trans activists consider it “transphobic” for anyone to believe that a child’s desistance from trans-identification would be preferable to persistence. (In fact, this accusation is leveled by Temple Newhook et al in their paper, in so many words.

This helps to explain why so many trans activists object to the very idea of studying persistence vs. desistance in the first place.) Yet, we find it mystifying that a preference for desistance is even controversial. Surely, if a child can find peace in his or her unaltered body–and happily avoid becoming a sterilized medical patient dependent for life on drugs and surgeries–that is a positive outcome.

To leverage an analogy popular with trans activists, many say that “gender affirming” medical treatment is analogous to treatment for children with life-threatening cancers. Yet who would not feel happy for the cancer patient who goes into remission, thus avoiding the ravages of chemo and radiation?

Furthermore, is it not possible to support young people in their gender atypicality, while at the same time encouraging bodily acceptance?

Central to this discussion is the trans-activist conflation of psychotherapeutic methods with conversion therapy. Zucker addresses this problem head-on on page 9:

Now, of course, it would not come as a surprise if Temple Newhook et al. (2018) took umbrage at the mere idea of a treatment arm designed to reduce a child’s gender dysphoria via psychotherapeutic methods. They might, for example, offer up the following from the seventh edition of the Standards of Care:

Treatment aimed at trying to change a person’s gender identity…to become more congruent with sex assigned at birth has been attempted in the past without success (Gelder & Marks, 1969; Greenson, 1964)….Such treatment is no longer considered ethical.” (Coleman et al., 2011, p. 175)

Yet, on the very same page of the Standards, one finds the following: “Psychotherapy should focus on reducing a child’s…distress related to the gender dysphoria…” (p. 175) or “Mental health professionals…. should give ample room for clients to explore different options for gender expression” (p. 175). The lack of internal consistency between the first statement and the second and third statements is rather astonishing.


“Reducing a child’s…distress related to the gender dysphoria” should be the primary goal of all treatment methods. Quite a few 4thWaveNow parents have observed that upon social transition, their children’s dysphoria actually increased. This is another aspect related to the different populations (early-onset vs. adolescent rapid-onset) that needs to be clarified but still remains unknown. Dr. Zucker explains that he “prefers the following summary statements about therapeutics with regard to children with gender dysphoria”:

Different clinical approaches have been advocated for childhood gender discordance….There have been no randomized controlled trials of any treatment….the proposed benefits of treatment to eliminate gender discordance…must be carefully weighed against… possible deleterious effects. (American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, 2012, pp. 968–969)

Very few studies have systematically researched any given mode of intervention with respect to an outcome variable in GID and no studies have systematically com- pared results of different interventions….In light of the limited empirical evidence and disagreements…among experts in the field…recommendations supported by the available literature are largely limited to the areas [reviewed] and would be in the form of general suggestions and cautions… (Byne et al., 2012, p. 772)

…because no approach to working with [transgender and gender nonconforming] children has been adequately, empirically validated, consensus does not exist regarding best practice with pre-pubertal children. Lack of consensus about the preferred approach to treatment may be due, in part, to divergent ideas regarding what constitutes optimal treatment outcomes… (American Psychological Association, 2015, p. 842)


Supporting Boys or Girls When the Line Isn’t Clear
By PATRICIA LEIGH BROWN DEC. 2, 2006

https://www.nytimes.com/2006/12/02/us/02child.html

.... Studies suggest that most boys with gender variance early in childhood grow up to be gay, and about a quarter heterosexual, Dr. Menvielle said. Only a small fraction grow up to identify as transgender.

.... Girls with gender-variant behavior, who have been studied less, voice extreme unhappiness about being a girl and talk about wanting to have male anatomy. But research has thus far suggested that most wind up as heterosexual women.
Although many children role-play involving gender, Dr. Menvielle said, “the key question is how intense and persistent the behavior is,” especially if they show extreme distress.

Dr. Robin Dea, the director of regional mental health for Kaiser Permanente in Northern California, said: “Our gender identity is something we feel in our soul. But it is also a continuum, and it evolves.”

Dr. Dea works with four or five children under the age of 15 who are essentially living as the opposite sex. “They are much happier, and their grades are up,” she said. “I’m waiting for the study that says supporting these children is negative.”

But Dr. Kenneth Zucker, a psychologist and head of the gender-identity service at the Center for Addiction and Mental Health in Toronto, disagrees with the “free to be” approach with young children and cross-dressing in public. Over the past 30 years, Dr. Zucker has treated about 500 preadolescent gender-variant children. In his studies, 80 percent grow out of the behavior, but 15 percent to 20 percent continue to be distressed about their gender and may ultimately change their sex.

Dr. Zucker tries to “help these kids be more content in their biological gender” until they are older and can determine their sexual identity — accomplished, he said, by encouraging same-sex friendships and activities like board games that move beyond strict gender roles.


Though she has not encountered such a situation, Jennifer Schwartz, assistant principal of Chatham Elementary School outside Springfield, Ill., said that allowing a child to express gender differences “would be very difficult to pull off” there.

Ms. Schwartz added: “I’m not sure it’s worth the damage it could cause the child, with all the prejudices and parents possibly protesting. I’m not sure a child that age is ready to make that kind of decision.” ....
It is a lot easier to fool people than show them how they have been fooled.
User avatar
guruilla
 
Posts: 1376
Joined: Mon Dec 13, 2010 3:13 am
Location: Canada
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: US Government rules on Gender Identity

Postby guruilla » Fri Jul 13, 2018 3:32 pm

Heaven Swan » Sun Jul 08, 2018 11:10 am wrote:The AI angle is something I want to look into. The human family unit may be oppressive and in shambles (largely because of inherent sexist authoritarianism) but destroying the basis of family ties and family loyalty and somehow extinguishing the cohesion or even the instinct would go a long way to making humans controllable across the board..


The transgender to transhumanism continuum - once so controversial at this board - has become much more visible in the past couple of years.

When you think about the headliners at a music festival, it’s unlikely that the first person to pop into your head would be Martine Rothblatt—the founder of Sirius XM, the one-time highest-paid female CEO in the world who made a robot clone of her wife, and the founder of the Terasem religion, which believes we’ll live forever by uploading our consciousness to the cloud.

But Moogfest, a four-day citywide festival of music and technology in Durham, North Carolina, was not the average music festival. Unlike other festivals that make cursory overtures to technology, Moogfest dedicated as much time to explaining how technology influences creativity as to the creative output itself, even listing headline ‘technologists’ alongside its top-billed musical acts.

On the festival’s second day, Friday 20 May, Rothblatt took the stage to talk to a packed house at Durham’s Carolina Theater, in an atmosphere that felt far more like a TED talk than a music fest. Rothblatt, who is transgender, discussed the contentious North Carolina HB2 law, which bans transgender people from using public bathrooms of the gender they identify with; the idea that creativity would be better encouraged by free college tuition; and how she got to a point where she and her company, United Therapeutics, can actually think about 3D printing new body parts, and leaving our bodies behind—if we want. “You want to win more than you want to live,” she told the rapt crowd. “You yell ‘Geronimo’ as you jump crazily into monopolistic opposition.”

Quartz sat down with Rothblatt after her talk to chat more about her thoughts on AI, living forever, free education, and what happens to the soul once we’ve made digital copies of ourselves: https://qz.com/694386/the-ceo-of-a-publ ... -internet/


Terasem seems to be involved in trans-activism:

Dana Turner uniquely navigated the worlds of civil rights law, public theater activism and computerized research. She was born October 13, 1954 in Gary, Indiana, grew up in California and graduated from Georgetown Law School. After working at the Library of Congress she moved to New York City to practice law on behalf of the transgender and HIV+ communities. She used her lively sense of humor, magnetic personality and strategic insight to pioneer the use of public theatre for civil rights activism. This was famously achieved with her organization of, and starring in, the first ever Drag Show on the Mall at the 1992 March on Washington for Gay & Lesbian Rights. She later starred for several years as the “Mz Liberty” persona on behalf of oppressed people in New York City Gay Pride events. Her work for the International Conferences on Transgender Law & Employment Policy helped put the “T” in the GLBT alliance, as well as deepen its sensitivity to issues of race, class and gender. Ms. Turner was particularly respected for her computerized legal research, which she used to aid many economically, racially and sexually oppressed people. She also served on the board of the World Against Racism Foundation, and provided legal support to the Sylvia Rivera Law Project**.

... A public visitation will be held at the Terasem Movement Transreligion Ashram at 2 Park Place, in Bristol, Vermont

https://octaviabutler.blogspot.com/


**The Sylvia Rivera Law Project works to guarantee that all people are free to self-determine their gender identity and expression, regardless of income or race, and without facing harassment, discrimination, or violence. SRLP is a collective organization founded on the understanding that gender self-determination is inextricably intertwined with racial, social and economic justice. Therefore, we seek to increase the political voice and visibility of low-income people of color who are transgender, intersex, or gender non-conforming. SRLP works to improve access to respectful and affirming social, health, and legal services for our communities. We believe that in order to create meaningful political participation and leadership, we must have access to basic means of survival and safety from violence.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sylvia_Rivera_Law_Project


History of the International Conference on Transgender Law and Employment Policy, Inc.

The International Conference on Transgender Law and Employment Policy, Inc., has become known as ICTLEP and The Transgender Law Conference and also as TRANSGEN __ (the blank is the year of that conference)

... I knew that I had enough local resources and friends to provide speakers in all of the areas except for military law (no military base within 150 miles), health law (an area that I knew nothing about) and employment law (since LGBT folks had NO protection in Texas). Interestingly, those were the first three areas for with volunteers appeared. Sharon Stuart, a former military JAG officer, approached me as asked if she could please do military law. Guess what I said? Next I received a letter from Martine Rothblatt (then Marla Aspen) who asked if she could present a paper on health law. At the IFGE event Laura Skaer (then Laura Smiley) asked if she could do a paper on employment law. It was obvious to me that this conference was fated to happen since the three gaps were known to no one but me, not even the committee, but these were the first three speakers to volunteer.

http://www.transgenderlegal.com/ictlephis1.htm

Rothbatt's platform goes back over 30 years:

The Apartheid of Sex: A Manifesto on the Freedom of Gender, Martine Aliana Rothblatt
Crown Publ., 1995 - Social Science - 178 pages

Is the categorization of people from the moment of birth as either male or female a form of sexual segregation as pernicious as racial apartheid? In this bold and provocative manifesto, Martine Rothblatt cites current academic opinion and research to argue that the answer is yes - and that the time is right for a new sexual revolution. In The Apartheid of Sex, Rothblatt makes a case for the adoption of a new sexual model that accommodates every possible shade of gender identity. It reveals that traditional male and female roles are dictated neither by genetics, genitals, nor reproductive biology, but rather by social attitudes that originated in early patriarchal cultures and that have been institutionalized in modern law. In the name of the countless people of unique gender who continue to suffer on the procrustean bed of sexual duality, Rothblatt calls for a new acceptance of human sexuality in all its prismatic variety.

https://books.google.ca/books/about/The ... edir_esc=y


From Transgender to Transhuman: A Manifesto on the Freedom of Form, Martine Aliana Rothblatt
2011 - Gender identity - 156 pages

Martine Rothblatt is responsible for launching several satellite communications companies, including the first nationwide vehicle location system (Geostar, 1983), the first private international spacecom project (PanAmSat, 1984), the first global satellite radio network (WorldSpace, 1990), and the first non-geostationary satellite-to-car broadcasting system (Sirius, 1990). As an attorney-entrepreneur she was also responsible for leading the efforts to obtain worldwide approval, via new international treaties, of satellite orbit/spectrum allocations for space-based navigation services (1987) and for direct-to-person satellite radio transmissions (1992). In the 1990s Dr. Rothblatt entered the life sciences field by leading the International Bar Association's project to develop a draft Human Genome Treaty for the United Nations (submitted in 1999), and by founding a biotechnology company, United Therapeutics (1996). Dr. Rothblatt is the author of books on satellite communications technology (Radiodetermination Satellite Services and Standards, Artech, 1987), gender freedom (Apartheid of Sex, Crown, 1995), genomics (Unzipped Genes, Temple University Press, 1997) and xenotransplantation (Your Life or Mine, Ashgate House, 2003). She is also cyberscripted and produced one of the first cybermuseums, the World Against Racism Museum, http://www.endracism.org.

https://books.google.ca/books?id=39iMZw ... 4Q6AEIJzAA



It is a lot easier to fool people than show them how they have been fooled.
User avatar
guruilla
 
Posts: 1376
Joined: Mon Dec 13, 2010 3:13 am
Location: Canada
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: US Government rules on Gender Identity

Postby Elvis » Fri Jul 13, 2018 6:01 pm

AD: Sorry, this thread remains off limits.

viewtopic.php?f=8&t=40036&start=240#p635946
"Frankly, I don't think it's a good idea but the sums proposed are enormous."
User avatar
Elvis
 
Posts: 5451
Joined: Fri Apr 11, 2008 7:24 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: US Government rules on Gender Identity

Postby Heaven Swan » Fri Jul 13, 2018 9:46 pm

Great stuff Guruilla, thanks for posting.
I won’t recopy because of length but I’m referring to Guruilla’s above post about Martine Rothblatt and trans humanism.

I did know of ‘her’ but you gathered some well-chosen samples of things I hadn’t seen.

Rothblatt and trans-billionaires like her bankrolled the trans movement and through NGOs like Silvia Rivera Law project, funded law personnel who stealthily pushed through all the pro-trans laws and insurance coverage that seemed to appear almost out of nowhere.

Everything is handed to trans, they dont’t have to fight for anything so they pass their time harassing lesbians, who they are obsessed with. (Google “cotton ceiling” for more info)

GET THE L OUT!

With regard to transhumanism, in my conversations with MKUltra survivors, a recurring theme was the high-level perp’s interest in physical immortality, preserving their bodies and living forever...that sort of thing.

Rothblatt sees the human as computer as such a wonderful and liberating thing. I guess a future of being an immortal god on Mount Olympus controlling and being served by masses of happy robot-like beings is appealing to him.

I mean, who needs nature, God, or spirit realms when we have Martine Rothblatt?
"Bow to your oppressor and you will be destroyed. Dare to fight and you will liberate the world."
User avatar
Heaven Swan
 
Posts: 525
Joined: Thu Feb 20, 2014 7:22 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: US Government rules on Gender Identity

Postby Jerky » Sat Jul 14, 2018 4:55 am

I know a few trans people IRL (and am friends with many more online), and I have never, ever heard any of them say anything bad - and especially not "violent" - against women in general and lesbians in particular. So I'm not really sold on this idea that there's a "flood of death and rape threats" being aimed at lesbians from some center for trans propaganda or whatever is being alleged in some of the above posts.

I have, however, seen some reaction (again, nothing even close to the crisis being described above) against some of the more extreme TERF statements, but that's to be expected considering the rhetoric coming from those corners often comes off as delirious and unhinged (and I say this despite agreeing with some TERF assertions regarding the necessity of some female only spaces).

As for Martine Rothblatt, she's a legitimate genius innovator and a self-made success who played a significant role not only in the development of satellite radio, but also in the life-saving technology of OnStar, and she also helped shepherd the Human Genome Project into a more complete and accurate form than it would have been without her input. So she has some weird ideas about the life, the universe, and everything. Guess what? All the most interesting people do! I see no need to attack her on a personal level. She seems an altogether admirable individual, deserving the respect of being referred to by the gender she has chosen to live her life as for the past QUARTER FUCKING CENTURY. Does that not seem reasonable to most of you, as well? She's a she. Deal with it.

And finally, why is it that AD is "not allowed" to participate in this thread (and how is such a thing even possible, to be banned from individual discussions?)?

Cheers!
yer old pal Jerky
User avatar
Jerky
 
Posts: 1957
Joined: Fri Apr 22, 2005 6:28 pm
Location: Toronto, ON
Blog: View Blog (0)

PreviousNext

Return to General Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 15 guests