Member Topic: Do you support the queer community? - Page 9

Originally posted by: return_to_hades

What is going on

Need more context to answer this question…

Amazing discussion! Despite being an ardent supporter of the LGBT movement, I have problem with the radical trans movement that has taken the world by storm (no wonder, the LGBs are asking for a separation from the T). I do support trans people's rights, but I do have problems with childhood transitioning, puberty blockers, this whole notion of "You are whatever gender you identify as", and biological males participating in women's sports, going to women's bathroom, prisons just by identifying as a women. I will go through the responses and respond in due time.

Originally posted by: return_to_hades

This is factually incorrect and appears to be from disreputable sources that intend to cause alarm.

Puberty blockers are typically

- histrelin acetate that is implanted in the skin and lasts a year

- leuprolide acetate which is a shot that lasts only 1-4 months

All these do is block testosterone and estrogen from creating puberty-related changes. When stopped puberty kicks in immediately.

Chemical castration drugs are totally different.

- Diethylstilbestrol lowers testosterone in adultmen

- benperidol decreases libido

- MPA and DMPA have been administered to reduce libido but they are also in birth control, menopause therapy, treatment of endometriosis, and even some types of cancer.

I recommend referring to Mayo Clinic, Cleveland Clinic, or NSF papers for accurate information on everything related to sexual health.

Puberty blockers like Lupron (which isn't FDA approved for their current use in medical transitioning) has been used historically for chemical castration of sex offenders. This is an indisputable fact.

Puberty blockers were initially used for people who had precocious puberty (like a 5 year old getting puberty and developing breasts). Puberty blockers worked for them. Puberty blockers weren't developed for gender dysphoric teens in mind, and it hasn't even been a decade that the medical community has started to use puberty blockers for this purpose. We don't even know what their long term effects are as they haven't even been used for a long time to begin with. You can't, for all intents and purposes, say "Puberty blockers are completely harmless and reversible" when their long term effects are completely unknown.

Puberty blockers are not psychologically reversible. Both the brain and the body matures during puberty and adolescence, and stopping ones natural puberty does have repercussion on your development. Children who are put onto puberty blockers have stunted development (when compared with their peers), problems with bone density, develops micro penises (which means there aren't enough tissues to even create a trans vagina).

I specifically wanted to respond to your bold red underlined statement ("When stopped puberty kicks in immediately"):

Here is the problem with that: nearly every child (close to 100%) who takes puberty blockers go on to take cross sex hormones and then follow the path towards medical transitioning. Less than 1% desist.

Puberty blockers are advertised as being completely reversible and that it's just a pause button and you can stop taking this drug and then get back to your original puberty any time you want. This is what is advertised, except for the fact that hardly anyone ever gets off of them. I mean if the whole point of puberty blocker is that they are a pause button, and in that time we allow the teenager to think about their transitioning, and if they decide to not go with it they can stop taking the drugs and return back to their original sex, etc etc -- then that main point isn't working because rarely anyone goes off the drugs. Once teenagers are put onto puberty blockers, studies show close to 100% of them go on to take cross sex hormones and then medically transition later in life. So much for being a "pause button" if rarely anyone pauses it. You say when stopped puberty kicks in immediately -- but if they are rarely ever stopped (less than 1% stops taking puberty blockers), what is even the point?

On the contrary, extensive research does show that 70-90% of gender dysphoric teens do grow out of their gender dysphoria if allowed to pass through their natural puberty (i.e. a male going through male puberty, female going through female puberty). Once they pass through their natural puberty, they grow more comfortable with their own bodies and actual biological sex. Most of them will turn out to be gay or lesbian later in life, but the vast, overwhelming majority will grow out of their gender dysphoria if just allowed to pass through puberty. Puberty alone cures them of their gender dysphoria. This has been proven by extensive studies and researches over several years. Only a tiny 10-30% are still dysphoric, and they can chose to transition once they are adults.

On the contrary, when you put people on puberty blockers, hardly anyone ever grows out of their dysphoria, and instead chose to medically transition. By putting people on to puberty blockers, we are taking away their only chance of growing out of their gender dysphoria, and putting them onto a life long path to medicalization.

Here is a video by Miriam Grossman where she lightly touches on puberty blockers, how they came to be used for gender transitioning and the problems associated with them. She's an M.D. who used to work for gender affirming care, but who has since left that post after seeing the horrors of the long-term effect of transitioning and the increasing number of post-transition regrets and detransitioning:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wIh8tvRLqck

Originally posted by: return_to_hades

A child gets into an accident and breaks their bones. They should be denied pain medication and surgery to mend their broken bones?

Very wrong analogy. Reverse case has also happened: someone doesn't break any bones, they just assume that they have broken their bones due to a minor injury that didn't do any lasting damage, now the medical professionals provide the person with pain medications and surgery, and later the person and medics realize that it was all a deception. Now the person is in even more trouble after getting the wrong medication and surgery.

A lot of children and teenagers coming out as trans aren't really so. They are confused, as so many children and teenagers are. Most of them will grow out of their gender dysphoria (70-90% as studies show) as they pass through puberty and matures. However, now the medical community believes any child who say they are trans, and puts them onto puberty blockers and then cross sex hormones and slowly surgeries and whatnot. I know people mention that the de-transitioning rate and regret rate is pretty low, but that is based on earlier data when people used to have to go through rigorous evaluations and what not to transition. Now with the restrictions loosening, and children and teens getting into transitioning routine before their brains have even matured, the regret rate and de-transition rate will grow much higher.

1. Gender-affirming treatment is not given without parental consent.

They absolutely have been given in many states in America, and in many other countries like Canada as well.

Watch this, she provides citation for this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IoDSky9ZOCM

2. Children cannot get top surgery. I mean, you literally cannot remove breasts that do not exist. Only someone who has gone through puberty fully has breasts.

A 15 years old is still a child. If we don't allow people below 18 to drink alcohol, if we don't allow people below 18 to drive cars or vote or get a tattoo or have plastic surgeries, we shouldn't allow 12 years old to get puberty blockers and 16 years old to get cross sex hormones, and sometimes even younger people to go under the knife for transitioning purpose.

I think there are exceptions. Gynecomastia is a procedure, where cisgender men need to have surgery to remove enlarged breasts.

I think this is something we all need to have a rational discussion about.

I agree that intact men need to be prohibited from some female spaces like public restrooms, changing rooms, women's prisons, etc. But at the same time, transwomen are most likely to face sexual violence and assault. So we need to address

Up until the last decade or so, people had to go through extensive surgeries, hormone treatments and psychiatric evaluations before they were granted their gender recognition certificate. There wouldn't be a problem with such an old-school transsexual in accessing their preferred sex's space because if they passes, no one would know they are even trans to begin with. Someone like Blaire White can easily go into a women's bathroom and no women will feel uncomfortable or uneasy as she has gone through multiple surgeries and hormone treatments and looks completely like a feminine woman.

Problem is, now any men -- any male-bodied men who looks 100% like a man and has done literally nothing, like no surgery, no hormone treatments, not even a psychiatric evaluation to prove their gender dysphoria -- can enter women's bathroom by simply identifying as a women. Now the notion is, your sex is just a identity in your head, and you can identify as a man, woman, nonbinary whateever you want, and get into protected spaces by just identifying as the other sex. There has been cases where male rapists (who raped women) were put onto female prisons because the rapist identified as a woman in courtroom, and everyone had to agree with their self-identified label. And then these men end up raping all the female prisoners in jail, but despite that they are housed in women's prisons because they identify as women.

- if a transfemale is underage and unable to obtain surgery what spaces should she choose? Will she be safe in a male space?

If the transfemale (a biological male who identifies as a woman) has done nothing to remotely pass off as a women (like no surgery or hormone treatment), I don't think it's fair to allow such a person inside women's protected spaces (same for transmale). Moreover, since this transfemale hasn't done any surgery, if he/she looks like a man (sorry don't know what pronoun is appropriate), then I don't think he/she would be at a risk in male bathroom.

- if a transwoman cannot afford corrective surgery or is still saving up for it, what spaces should she choose? Will she be safe in a male space?

IMO if one hasn't done any surgery to even remotely appear as the other sex, i.e. a transperson that doesn't 'pass' (I hope you are aware what passing means in trans terminology), then they should use the space of their original sex. Once you actually transition, you can use the opposite sex's space.

Or better yet -- lobby for a 3rd space. A gender neutral bathroom, which any transgendered or non-binary people can use. It isn't hard for 1st world countries. I mean, if Stonewall can throw millions to promote LGBT issue, they can use some of that to create a 3rd, gender neutral space.

Since men tend to be stronger and faster, I think it is reasonable to question the fairness of transwomen in female sports. Most sports associations are grappling with their own rules. IOC used to require surgical transition but now only has hormonal limits. Hormonal limits do affect cisgender women like Caster Semenya and Duttee Chand who naturally produce more testosterone than other women and have to take testosterone blockers to participate.

- Should we revert to requiring surgical transition as well? What happens to athletes who are too young or cannot afford surgery? What category should they participate in.

Even transitioning won't cut it, because once a male has gone through male puberty, if he transitions afterwards, no amount of hormone treatment or surgery will make up for male puberty. Male puberty gives biological men a huge competitive edge in physical strength, and it's not only unfair to biological females, but also incredibly risky.

If transitioning happens pre-puberty, it might be a different scenario.

- Should all athletes including cisgender athletes be subject to hormonal limits?

- What about genetic anomalies that allow for competitive edges? Michael Phelps produces an unusually low amount of lactic acid which means his muscles don't tire as fast as the normal person. He also has disproportionately longer limbs and flexible joints.

You are trying to get to the point that some people are naturally born with competitive advantage, so even within all-female sports for example, some female may have genetic or biological advantage over the other females, and if we don't ban them then why ban males from partaking in female sports. I understand that, but I'd say it's pretty rare for people to have huge competitive advantage over others in every area: someone might have long legs but they may have less stamina, someone might have amazing stamina and strength but they may have cardiovascular issue etc. So generally it balances out. But males have like a 100 advantages over female in physical feats like sports. There is a reason why in physically intensive sports, we have always separated males from females. When you have someone like Lea Thomas -- who isn't even in the top 400 players within males -- becoming the #1 when he partakes with female, you realize there is an issue here.

- What about transmale athletes like Mack Beggs who asked to compete in male leagues but were forced to compete in female leagues where he had the advantage of higher testosterone levels and obliterated the competition?

In terms of sports, I believe letting data decide. And we need data points to analyze data. I am all for transwomen competing in female sports with the caveat that we are entering a ten-year data collection period. Over the next ten years, data will be collected on hormonal levels, surgical status, and athletic performance and then analyzed. If data shows that transwomen had an advantage they will be stripped of their titles. If data does not show any discernible advantage the matter is settled.

And FWIW, these questions are not to change your mind or opinions on transgender people, but as a means to frame a rational discussion so that people with opposing views can come to a middle ground or consensus somewhere. Those who are protrans also need to address issues like how do we protect women from bad faith actors from harming women?

I am sure most trans people are good people, but the problem is now the new gender recognition act puts self-ID as the main denominator of your sex. If you say you are a man, you are a man, despite the fact that you have been born with XX chromosomes and vulva. Likewise if you say you are a woman, you are one even if you have a penis dangling in between your legs. With this new gender recognition act law, any man can get inside woman's protected spaces by saying they are a woman -- no surgeries or hormone treatment. I find that notion very problematic.

Is it really transphobic for women wishing not to be exposed to male genitalia in a female dressing room, especially if children are present? Is it really transphobic if a gay man does not want to date someone without a penis or a lesbian does not want to date someone with one?

Good to see a sensible line of argument that is not progressive blather cloaked in argumentum ad passiones.

Originally posted by: Blood_Sacrifice

Amazing discussion! Despite being an ardent supporter of the LGBT movement, I have problem with the radical trans movement that has taken the world by storm (no wonder, the LGBs are asking for a separation from the T). I do support trans people's rights, but I do have problems with childhood transitioning, puberty blockers, this whole notion of "You are whatever gender you identify as", and biological males participating in women's sports, going to women's bathroom, prisons just by identifying as a women. I will go through the responses and respond in due time.

About your other posts, gender dysphoria isn't a true marker of a trans person, it is gender euphoria. To put it simply, it's not the discomfort of being called something but when a transwoman is called as a woman, is she feeling happy, fulfilled? That is the marker.

Nextly, not everyone (teenager) can get blockers and other medications unless they go through extensive therapy and loads of tests that affirm they really want to transition or there is something not matching with their existing identity.

About men getting access to women's washrooms n stuff, that is entirely on the individuals. That is why we've been asking for gender neutral washrooms everywhere.

Originally posted by: K.Universe.

Historically, the conviction that one’s gender doesn’t match one’s anatomical sex affected only .01 percent of children, almost exclusively boys.

[skeptic.com/reading_room/trans-science-review-of-abigail-shier-irreversible-damage-transgender-craze-seducing-our-daughters/]

It's interesting that you mentioned Abigail Shier's name and her work here, because she was one of the first people I read about when I became interested in the debates surrounding transgenderism.

I've her audiobook -- Irreversible Damage -- downloaded in my mobile, but haven't gotten around to listen to it. Maybe I will do it sometime now.

But I found this video very informative and enlightening:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DWbxIFC0Q2o&t=717s

It might seem long, but it addresses pretty much all the hot-button issues, esp. how the gender has now flipped (from male to female) and the abnormal and exponential increase happening in less than a decade.

In 2018, the UK reported a 4400% rise over the previous decade in teenage girls seeking gender treatments. In the US, the prevalence of adolescent gender dysphoria has increased by over 1000% in the last decade. California, New York, Massachusetts, Washington topped the charts.

Based on what I have read, people pointed out social contagion and media influences as a reason behind that. Lisa Littman wrote a paper on how adolescent girls with other comorbidities (like eating disorder, anorexia, autism etc) were being 'influenced' through social medias like Tiktok, Instagram, reddit that if they transition, all their problems will be solved. That multiple friends and sometimes even entire friend circle would become transgender identified at the same time. Abigail Shier makes a similar argument iirc. That teenage girls are easily influenced by the media and peers, and near exclusively this trans phenomenon was seen amongst teenage girls from affluent backgrounds who came from severely broken families and had very problematic upbringing, and nearly all of them were suffering from a host of other health issues like anorexia and even autism.

However Lisa Littman's paper was criticized for using inaccurate data collection method (like surveying the parents of the transgender girls instead of the girls themselves).

Is there a positive correlation between a nation and the numbers for adolescent gender dysphoria? More "advanced" the nation, higher the numbers? Similarly, within an advanced nation, is there a positive correlation between a state /province and the numbers for adolescent gender dysphoria? More "liberal" the state/province, higher the numbers? If there is a correlation, to what specific factor do you attribute the rise in numbers?

Certainly people have higher chance of coming out as a trans in more affluent and liberal societies. But still this exponential increase is difficult to account for. Also, as Abigail Shier argues, how come we rarely see any people in their 40s or 50s or 60s coming out as trans. Why is this trans phenomenon mostly seen in teenagers, the same age group that is so impressionable and falls to social contagion so easily.

One thing though you have to remember that we originally started with a very low number. Initially, gender dysphoria wasn't well documented, and there were hardly about 19 girls in the whole of UK who were diagnosed with it. So when you start with such a low figure as 19, any kind of increase will seem huge. Maybe the increase will level out in the future.

In those states and in those countries where the numbers are negligible (statistically speaking), would it mean they are sweeping a problem under the rug or there is no problem to speak of?

We know trans people exists in 3rd world countries too. iirc you are from India, so you must know of the hijra community. But it's difficult to get a good estimate of the number of people who are trans in those societies for obvious reasons, so any kind of comparison is difficult.

Originally posted by: Blood_Sacrifice

I find this very regressive and backwards. We fought so hard to eradicate gender roles. We said boys can play with dolls and girls can play rough sports, etc etc and it shouldn't effect their gender. And now we have gone back to ancient era where we are saying "Oh a boy likes playing with dolls! There must be a girl spirit trapped in him, he needs to transition".

Yeah, it's not so simplistic, but I do believe a large part of the desire to transition is driven by a desire to fit in with established gender norms. Boys and girls who show gender non-conforming behavior are now assumed to be trans, and encouraged that their only way to salvation is through surgically altering themselves to be the other sex. Look up Stonewall's definition of trans -- it's basically anyone who goes against societal established norms that is expected from their gender. I find this very regressive. So much for vanquishing gender norms.

Thank you for your responses to my posts. I would love to respond and continue engaging in discussion. But it's been a while - and I am ready to move on. But I did want to take a moment to acknowledge and appreciate your thoughtfulness.

This part here is the one that resonated with me. This is where I struggle with transgender rights. For a good part of my life, I fought for my right to break female gender norms. I continue to be a very masc presenting woman who is very comfortable in my body as a female. I play male characters in video games, Dungeons & Dragons, and play male characters in plays. But I don't feel a need to surgically alter my body - I can do all those things with my female body. So it baffles me why all of a sudden that behavior makes people feel like they are in the wrong body.

That being said most transgender people I have known have been wonderful human beings. I don't understand their reasons to transition, but I don't understand why women want to carry a bowling ball in their uterus and push it out their vagina nine months later either. I will always fight for their rights to be treated as human beings. But I will also continue to question some things as well.

Originally posted by: return_to_hades

Thank you for your responses to my posts. I would love to respond and continue engaging in discussion. But it's been a while - and I am ready to move on. But I did want to take a moment to acknowledge and appreciate your thoughtfulness.

Hi RTH. If you are free, and wish to engage in any particular point, feel free to do so. I became interested in transgender issues pretty recently. Despite being part of the LGBT community for so long, my interest has always been on the gay and lesbian issue. I did feel sympathy for trans people, but beyond that I didn't know much about it. But now trans issues are on the forefront -- from male players identifying as women and partaking in women's sports, to J K Rowling being vilified to no end (and I was one of those people who almost jumped on the hate bandwagon), it is difficult to avoid trans issues now. So I started reading up and researching, and I found a lot of the radical trans movement pretty disturbing. Esp. kids as young as 4 saying they are born in the wrong body (what do they understand about biological sex or even gender) and parents and society reinforcing this, to puberty blockers to the whole "There are 100s of genders and you can identify as whatever you want" notion -- they were all pretty disturbing. I do support an adult person's right to transition, however.

So when I suddenly came to DM (which has become something like a dead mansion now LOL), and saw this topic, and the thoughtful responses, I thought of jumping in, because I haven't had the chance to discuss trans issues with anyone before.

This part here is the one that resonated with me. This is where I struggle with transgender rights. For a good part of my life, I fought for my right to break female gender norms. I continue to be a very masc presenting woman who is very comfortable in my body as a female. I play male characters in video games, Dungeons & Dragons, and play male characters in plays. But I don't feel a need to surgically alter my body - I can do all those things with my female body. So it baffles me why all of a sudden that behavior makes people feel like they are in the wrong body.

This is exactly what I am talking about. According to Stonewall's website, the biggest LGBT organization, they define transgender as anyone who doesn't fit well into the traditional stereotypes that is generally associated with their assigned sex. So a boy who doesn't like stereotypically masculine things (like car racing) and prefers streotypically feminine things (like playing with dolls and dresses) is a trans to them.

Up until now, we were trying to break these stereotypes surrounding gender norms. The feminism movement, and esp. the gay rights movement, came to say that these gender roles are prescribed by society, and that there is no reason to stick to them, that a boy can do traditionally girly things and a girl can do traditionally boyish things. And yet, the same group is now saying a boy who likes traditionally girly things must now be a girl spirit who is trapped in a boy's body, and he needs to transition to do those girly things. This completely goes against the very philosophy that they were initially espousing.

I think this notion is going to harm young gays and lesbians as most of them turn out to be pretty gender nonconforming.

That being said most transgender people I have known have been wonderful human beings. I don't understand their reasons to transition, but I don't understand why women want to carry a bowling ball in their uterus and push it out their vagina nine months later either. I will always fight for their rights to be treated as human beings. But I will also continue to question some things as well.

I assume the issue with transgender and transitioning goes much deeper than gender nonconformity. I think they feel deeply saddened and physically ill with a body that feels alien to them. But there hasn't been any fruitful research done on gender dysphoria.

By the way, have you seen Matt Walsh's "What is a Woman?". It's a brilliantly made documentary on this issue we are talking about, and touches on pretty much every aspect of the current trans movement (pretty much everything we talked about here). It hosts interviews with scientists, medical professionals, psychiatrists, therapists, doctors, etc. It's biased and obviously has an agenda (made by a right wing conservative) but doesn't stop it from being brilliant.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=42ivIRd9N8E

Originally posted by: K.Universe.

Good to see a sensible line of argument that is not progressive blather cloaked in argumentum ad passiones.

Hi Mr K!!! LOL, I got called hater, transphobe, bigot etc etc for voicing these views on LGBT sites. As part of the community, the insults were even worse.

Honestly, the trans people aren't the issue. Most of them are very vulnerable and marginalized, and just want to live their best lives without hurting anyone. it's the trans activists and this radical trans movement that I have a problem with.