The costs of trans visibility

I'm not sure why you are asking me for regulations. But, to answer your question - I don't know.

Now that that's out of the way. Don't all medical procedures and drugs have to be approved for widespread (non-clinical trial) use? Is that approval ever reversed? An internet search seems to say that it happens more than occasionally.

good, and very good for the guardian to call them "people who question their gender identity" because we have no way yet at that stage to know if they are trans or not.

This is where you lose most people from many political camps.

GD appears to be a real condition and a difficult one. People are willing to give them a break.

Then, the ideology swoops in. One needn't be GD to be trans. And then we have non binary, which appears to be something dreamed up by college profs in dubious fields.

Chomsky's dunk on Pomo is, the claims are either trivial or insane. In this case: most guys aren't Hulk Hogan. Most girls aren't Pam Anderson. There are people like Prince or David Bowie and most of have some tendencies from both sides.

This is trivial. Almost nobody would disagree.

A boy who doesn't like sports and wears scarves isn't male but some new magical category and we must all dance to accommodate zim. This is crazy.

Luci says this is leftist, but it's debatable. It seems to partly be a way for very fortunate people to pretend they are oppressed when really, they should be helping genuinely unfortunate/oppressed people. (Also crazy). Not to mention you make it harder for people with GD.

Maybe I'm missing something. I spent a while looking for substantial account of NB the other day. Found a reddit thread where a guy asked about, raising a number of common sense points most would agree with. The replies were all either cult behavior or what I described. I.e. someone saying, i was born male but have some feminine traits: a trivialities.

https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/co...

It seems roughly like thinking of yourself as a citizen of the world, rather than an American. That's fine. But don't get mad if a politician says "my fellow Americans" or demand a special passport. It's basically just a personal philosophy or account of things.

If there is a more substantial account, analogous to GD, I'd like to see it.

This is not what The Cass Report found:

they are just going to ignore any new data that conflicts with their mantra

I'm not...

I'm not sure if you are wilfully ignorant or obtuse, so let me spell it out.

Pausing a puberty at 9 using puberty blockers with a clearly defined pre-planned plan to remove them again at 11 is likely to provide an overall benefit to the child, with little long-term risks.

This is not the same as giving GD kids puberty blockers "so they can have time to consider their options" with no clearly defined end-point, and ultimately where 98% of them progress to cross-sex hormones.

FWIW I'm not against puberty blockers if it can be proven they are being used responsibly, and have an overall benefit to the child. However, at least in the UK, they have been used not to benefit the child, but as a gateway drug to give ideologically motivated clinicians time to convince the child and their parents that they are trans.

pausing a normally timed puberty randomly delaying it by 2 years without medical reasons is *likely to provide an overall benefit to the child* WHAT THE ACTUAL ****?

The evidence the above insane claim is true has to be provided by the insane claimants not by people saying "the normal H0 is you don't interfere with natural mechanism if there is no disease"

Puberty blockers are only given to kids with actual diseases! stuff you have to fix, wrong timing or excessive hormone production and the like. Unhealthy body processes.

The expression "gateway drug" is obviously used to insult and denigrate the whole ideology but it has a basis of truth, not in the "addiction to drug" sense but in the "by taking this drug you go down an horrible path in life that causes significant permanent damage very often".

Because yes getting sterilized by hormones is horrible and yes getting your genitals mutilated is horrible, intrinsecally so, even if you feel you need to do so to feel better, it's still an horrible thing.

LOL at "you have to provide evidence that pushing an healthy body puberty some years is bad"

Which doesn't mean it has to be a banned thing for adults, adults have a right to do horrible things to themselves if they want to. But it's still horrible

You'd recommend it for all children?

Nowhere is precocious puberty considered a disease except it your head. It is a condition.

Something new like the Cass Report?

Yeah that recommendation compared to 40+ years of safe usage means nothing.

Just trust the people who keep churning out fraudulent papers and make more money the more common it is to be trans.

You realize the people that told you there are no stupid questions were lying, right?

Thats kind how it works though. Lobotomies were the leading edge treatment at the time and is now considered ineffective and barbaric. It paved the way for more effective and humane treatments.

We will likely look at something like Chemotherapy as barbaric in the future as well. "Lets just poison the whole body until the cancer is wiped out because there is less cancer than whole body so hopefully the cancer dies first". That will seem quite barbaric to isolated laser treatments that irradicate cancer while only affecting ~1% of the surrounding healthy cells.

And I'm not calling puberty blockers barbaric, just stating a general philosophy

No really, lobotomies just made a ton of people zombies and we could have skipped that phase .

I really don't think we tried chemotherapy on children before knowing how it works in adults.

And really, being trans isn't like cancer, it is not a disease at all, so pretty simply it should not be treated by medical means, at all. Physicians should treat diseases

You'd be wrong. Modern Chemotherapy was developed on the back of experimental pediatric care

https://www.danafarberbostonchildrens.or....

Ok thx I learnt something.

Now if being trans was a deadly horrendous disease that destroys your body from within, we might be open to try even the unspeakable to cure it.

But given it is not a disease to begin with.. why are physicians discussing the topic at all? Why are they in the picture? Why are drugs in the picture?

Your last sentence is really stupid. Diseases are simply chronic conditions. Physicians should not be limited to treat just chronic conditions. Health check ups, mental health, immunization, preventive care and testing, obstetrics, emergency trauma care are all part of a well rounded healthcare system that rely on these different disciplines.

We know you are just dying to claim transgender as mental illness, you should rant about it here, rather than finance regulation.

Disease treatment and prevention is a tiny slice of doctoral care

We are at the "obstetrics and nurses who give you a vaccine jab are physicians" stage of the conversation

Lol, you need to learn a whole lot more given that last post.

I already told you several times that I defer to doctors about medical issues; do you have an issue with that? You asked why some of us don't oppose the use of drugs for medical issues - obviously those of us who are not doctors defer to them on legitimate medical issues. Never heard someone get incensed that others agreed with him because they weren't knowledgable enough to do so.

Speak for yourself, I only do when the medical consensus is exceptionally clear in one direction.

When it isn't I don't, and if I have something that requires medical attention, or people I care about do, I do my own research talking with medical establishment people I trust but I absolutely do not randomly trust someone on a controversial medical topic (hint: many of them are) just because of some credentials