The costs of trans visibility
Yesterday, Dylan Mulvaney broke her silence: https://www.tiktok.com/@dylanmulvaney/vi....
For context, this is a trans influencer who built a 10 million strong following on TikTok. She took a brand deal with budweiser to post an ad on an instagram, and the anti-trans right went absolutely ballistic, calling for a boycott, condemning the company, and to some perhaps unknowable degree it influenced that Budweiser sales dropped by a 1/4 and
. Dylan speaks more personally about the effect of the hatred on her.
What strikes me about this story is that it is just about visibility. This isn't inclusion in sports or gender-affirming care for minors, it was just that a trans person was visible. This wasn't even visibility in a TV commerical that a poor right-winger is forced to see, it was an ad on her own instagram page. We're all in our own social media algorithm influenced bubbles, but from my vantage point it really has seemed that in the last year or so things have just gotten worse for trans people and the backlash to even minor visibility is growing.
We need to do better.
I'm being generous as they are trying to present statistics and counter point directly so its probably the best material available in support of ROGD
It's amazing to see how blinded you are by all of this. I looked at a couple of your links. It's a circle jerk of activist journalists with pronouns in their bio getting the opinions and quotes from those that are deeply protective of "gender affirming care". You realize 'gender affirming care' is ideology right? Like this wasn't the result of some rigorous research that lead to "gender affirming care". It's ideologically formulated. I mean their core lie and statement defending it has been "do you want a trans child or dead child" which none of these people denounced. It's provably made up nonsense
So these people and organization have built themselves and in some cases a career on this ideology. They attack anything questioning it. That's normal but again, its not like they scientifically formulated their position while they feverishly question the research questioning it
It's basically this over and over and over
Article by
https://x.com/broderick_timmy?ref_src=tw...
“To even say it’s a hypothesis at this point, based on the paucity of research on this, I think is a real stretch,” says Eli Coleman, former president of the World Professional Association for Transgender Health. Coleman helped create the organization’s most recent standards of care for trans people, which endorse and explain the evidence for forms of gender-affirming care.
“This is just a fear-based concept that is not supported by studies,” says Marci Bowers, president of the World Professional Association for Transgender Health. The term ROGD is being used to “scare people or to scare legislators into voting for some of these restrictive policies that take away options for young people. It’s cruel, cruel legislation.”
The people bringing you 14 year olds medically transition after a 15 minute dr visit without their parents are very upset about these attacks on "gender affirming care"
I'm being generous as they are trying to present statistics and counter point directly so its probably the best material available in support of ROGD
It probably isn't the only or best quality evidence available, but I wasn't trying to argue either of these points when I replied to the original question, which was:
It's amazing to see how blinded you are by all of this. I looked at a couple of your links. It's a circle jerk of activist journalists with pronouns in their bio getting the opinions and quotes from those that are deeply protective of "gender affirming care". You realize 'gender affirming care' is ideology right? Like this wasn't the result of some rigorous research that lead to "gender affirming care". It's ideologically formulated. I mean
I posted two articles and three studies but sounds like you spent more time researching the author of one article than the studies in the articles? How very on brand. The point was really that there is an abundance of research available about ROGD being bunk, but very little about it being legitimate.
It probably isn't the only or best quality evidence available, but I wasn't trying to argue either of these points when I replied to the original question, which was:
Well, hilariously you posted the one study that was linked in the material I posted. The study that polled "parents of trans" from online forums (that may or may not have been slanted towards anti-trans). So in my materials, they explicitly poll substantive samples of diverse individuals who were Trans themselves. The other material you posted wasn't even a study, it was a letter trying to discredit surveys of Trans people. I wonder what would be a more acceptable source for capturing a trans individuals experience, the trans person themselves or their parent?
I'll let you guys think it out why anti-trans parents might only find out their trans kid is trans right before they transition and think it was rapid onset.
I agree it's been thoroughly lambasted by transactivists, but not "debunked".
Anyway, there are plenty of other papers on the topic, e.g.,
Detransition and Desistance Among Previo...
On average, participants first identified as transgender at 17.1 years of age and had done so for 5.4 years at the time of their participation. Most (83%) participants had taken several steps toward social transition and 68% had taken at least one medical step. By retrospective reports, fewer than 17% of participants met DSM-5 diagnostic criteria for Gender Dysphoria in Childhood. In contrast, 53% of participants believed that “rapid-onset gender dysphoria” applied to them.
Lmao Elrazor just linked A THIRD littman paper. See, I told you he doesn’t read his links.
Littman's peer reviewed papers >>> Wikipedia
Sample of 78 vs a one study sample of nearly 27000 represents a .2% population without normalizing for other studies with substantive sample sizes and extracting any overlap.
Littman and colleagues also analysed the same 27k data sample (that was authored by prominent transactivists) and did find evidence for ROGD, so if sample size is your only issue then that addresses it.
it also demonstrates you can make data mean anything if you are determined to, which I'm sure is Littman's point.
This notwithstanding the fact that the data in that report was collected in 2015, so how could anyone possibly collect meaningful data in 2015 on a phenomena that only become known in 2018?
I posted two articles and three studies but sounds like you spent more time researching the author of one article than the studies in the articles? How very on brand. The point was really that there is an abundance of research available about ROGD being bunk, but very little about it being legitimate.
This is you being dishonest again. You know how the internet works. I clicked on a link, highlighted the writers name, right-click search google, click on twitter profile, see the lol activism, copy and paste to 2+2. It's a 53.17 second process. It's so fast I did it again and same result. LGTB person with pronouns in bio cobbles together a "takedown" citing "experts" who are deeply invested in having kids being able to medically transition with zero obstacles
You keep acting like "gender affirming care" is evidence based and the result of research. It's not. When someone posts research to counter it, you act like if it has a flaw, dismiss it, we can go back to assume our ideological position with no research behind it is scientifically sound. This is why I pointed out the activists writing the article referencing the trans associations promoting gender affirming care for kids is a circle jerk. It seems to have totally warped your perception. You aren't starting from a scientific place, its an ideological one. Research challenging the ideological position falling short in some way doesn't magically make your ideological position something based on research or science
When they poll parents and fail disclose they were collected from a forum that's likely biased then potentially getting biased results doesn't make ROGD "bunk". It diminishes the credibility of the study that shows evidence of ROGD. I explained this to you and you know this, the trans movement is new and has recently exploded. Research is going to be scarce. They are using evidence pieced together from a studies here and there. Like I showed you, Haidt is an expert and highly respected in the field. Nothing close to an activist or anti-trans. He's looked at research of social contagion and he's looking at how this is affected clusters of girls. That's called evidence. So are the rates of teens growing out of their dysphoria at an incredibly high rate, which I also posted.
This seems like an appropriate place to share this thread. Check out the episode if you have time or care. I haven't seen it all yet
Finished the interview. Definitely worth watching
Apparently Britain stopped following the science. Or maybe they started
My twitter timeline has a bunch of "trans" culture war stuff over an Olympic boxing match where an Italian woman quickly quit to an Algerian one with some controversy over her biological sex. I have always said when it comes to sports at least this is how the trans controversy will eventually be resolved.
Women will just stop competing. And society at large, especially elites that shape policy, will have to decide what is more important: the sport or the ideology.
My twitter timeline has a bunch of "trans" culture war stuff over an Olympic boxing match where an Italian woman quickly quit to an Algerian one with some controversy over her biological sex. I have always said when it comes to sports at least this is how the trans controversy will eventually be resolved.
Women will just stop competing. And society at large, especially elites that shape policy, will have to decide what is more important:
it's super political in italy because ministers and politicians discussed it at length since the match pairing went up, given the victim was an italian athlete.
And it's very interesting to note that the international boxing association had banned those biological men from competing with women, the ICO allowed them.
not really. took me a long time to realize how depraved our leaders and institutions are. but I too, was once a liberal.
After watching the trans Algerian boxer face blast that Italian woman in under 50s in the Olympics, I'm starting to think we'll be roommates/neighbours sooner than I think. You may not be as crazy as I once thought. And don't worry I won't put a mezuzah on our door 
To be clear, this is an AFAB woman, not someone who is transgender (it's literally illegal to be transgender in Algeria where she's from), and is only relevant to transgender issues in that they're both impacted by gender eligibility rules for competing. There are contradictory claims about what the gender test actually was that resulted in her being disqualified from competition by the IBA last year (a confederation that has since been stripped of its authority for unrelated corruption).
It is of course an entirely reasonable thing to be talked about in this thread because it is related to discussions of gender characteristics and eligibility to compete in female sport but the boxer in question is definitively not transgender.
After watching the trans Algerian boxer face blast that Italian woman in under 50s in the Olympics, I'm starting to think we'll be roommates/neighbours sooner than I think. You may not be as crazy as I once thought. And don't worry I won't put a mezuzah on our door
Not the thread for this so I won't post more than this here but the boxer is not trans. She is a woman and has competed as a girl/woman her entire life. She is probably a woman with DSD (differences in sexual development) but even the evidence for that is circumstantial/hearsay because the Russian confederation that did the gender eligibility tests that resulted in her disqualification from a previous competition have never confirmed what the test was even testing for, let alone released the actual test results.
After watching the trans Algerian boxer face blast that Italian woman in under 50s in the Olympics, I'm starting to think we'll be roommates/neighbours sooner than I think. You may not be as crazy as I once thought. And don't worry I won't put a mezuzah on our door
The Italian boxer was pressured into abandoning the fight by her country. Its not like an olympic level boxer got punched one time and realized they were in a backwoods alabama style freak fight.
The Italian boxer was pressured into abandoning the fight by her country. Its not like an olympic level boxer got punched one time and realized they were in a backwoods alabama style freak fight.
Absolutely false. She was pressured to not even start the fight, but she started it.
She got punched much more powerfully than ever in her career she said, nose broke immediatly, went on her knees asking her dad (for whom she was fighting) to forgive her and she abandoned the fight.
This might be the international turning point of this specific cultural war issue, where we win and you guys lose, massively.
To be clear, this is an AFAB woman, not someone who is transgender (it's literally illegal to be transgender in Algeria where she's from), and is only relevant to transgender issues in that they're both impacted by gender eligibility rules for competing. There are contradictory claims about what the gender test actually was that resulted in her being disqualified from competition by the IBA last year (a confederation that has since been str
The olympic committee got rid of IBA oversight last year because the IBA is considered unequivocally corrupt
Absolutely false. She was pressured to not even start the fight, but she started it.
She got punched much more powerfully than ever in her career she said, nose broke immediatly, went on her knees asking her dad (for whom she was fighting) to forgive her and she abandoned the fight.
This might be the international turning point of this specific cultural war issue, where we win and you guys lose, massively.
0% chance her nose was broken
The girl went in with no mental, and crumbled like a faulty can. Pathetic performance. On the Olympic stage no less
Not the thread for this so I won't post more than this here but the boxer is not trans. She is a woman and has competed as a girl/woman her entire life. She is probably a woman with DSD (differences in sexual development) but even the evidence for that is circumstantial/hearsay because the Russian confederation that did the gender eligibility tests that resulted in her disqualification from a previous competition
? High testosterone level (Above allowed thresholds) and XY chromosomes.
I don't know why we are discussing this here though
To be clear, this is an AFAB woman, not someone who is transgender (it's literally illegal to be transgender in Algeria where she's from), and is only relevant to transgender issues in that they're both impacted by gender eligibility rules for competing. There are contradictory claims about what the gender test actually was that resulted in her being disqualified from competition by the IBA last year (a confederation that has since been str
It depends on the definition of that word, because the claim is that of XY chromosomes (which according to some/many people makes you a biological man, so if you identify as a female while having those chromosomes, it can be considered trans)
Plenty of women have beaten Imane Khelif in the ring. Just not this Italian one.
wikipedia says the ban was because she has xy chromosomes and elevated testosterone levels
