If you follow the conversation, you initially replied to a post about the use of hormones and puberty blockers by suggesting a kind of conspiracy. I have every right to continue the conversation under the idea you were referring to those who receive puberty blockers as treatment , otherwise your initial point is invalid. Why would it matter how a child see themselves in relation to puberty blockers if we’re limiting our scope to an odd cross section of children receiving no such treatment?

There are no “activists” just as there is no “woke” in regards to determining people’s actual positions.

Also no gaslighting?

?

To be sure there is such a thing as activists for various causes. but to equate “activism “ with a prism to view the world from that dictates someone’s view on things is wrong.

There is also “woke” people. in my definition of woke it means Black peoples who understand the layers of oppression they have faced, nothing more. “woke” on the right is a catch all mind disease to categorically dismiss any independent thinking. It is right wing progressivism.

I think it's pretty clear what point I'm making, and what you are disagreeing to.



I don't think anyone has mentioned desisting from puberty blockers as being the key point here. Not that this is unimportant, it clearly is. Puberty blockers are often described as a "pause" in puberty to give children the time to consider their identity. However, the vast majority of children who start on puberty blockers (>95% in the UK/Netherlands) progress to hormone treatment. So, it's much less a "pause" than a deterministic pathway.

Given the near certainty of progression from puberty blockers to hormones and potentially surgery, the key decision is whether to prescribe blockers.

The people I respect who are pushing back against “wokeness” are criticizing the identitarian aspect I mentioned (identity in place of self), even if they can’t articulate it precisely.

I’m fine using “identitarians” instead of woke to critique this group. Note to self.

It would be interesting to know how many gender affirming clinicians also vote republican, compared with the average republican vote among clinicians.

I don’t think it’s clear at all. If your point is most children diagnosed with gender dysphoria don’t actually have gender dysphoria, you continue to be wrong. If your point is most people have their gender dysphoria treated in ways other than sex reassignment surgery, then you’re refuting a lot of right wing talking points. The reality is, as your study shows most people referred for gender identity issues aren’t treated with puberty blockers 10 years later and in many cases not even diagnosed with gender dysphoria. This just proves the gender affirming care they receive doesn’t rush to hormone treatments and surgery like many of the agitprop suggests.

I bet it’s pretty small

Correct, I'm not claiming this.

My point is pretty clear. For most children, gender dysphoria disappears over time. That what multiple studies show and what I'm basing my opinion on.

No I haven’t. Plenty of posts here by me differentiate the two.
What “treatment regime?” Are you saying something is wrong with these minor patients that needs to be treated? I thought the only thing that was needed was for society to acknowledge the persons newfound gender.

They don’t care about things like that. They only care about grooming children into their cult.

I’ve actually posted many of those studies in this very thread. The pro trans crowd doesn’t care.

Even so, posting pictures of transgender people who you think are attractive seems like a road to nowhere. I certainly don't want the "transgender people are disgusting" crowd to think that they have license to invite mockery by posting pictures of unattractive people.

That's it. If gender is to be defined as an internal sense of one's self, then what argument is being made by posting pictures of someone with good makeup?

You missed the point of the post. That person isnt transgender. That was my point.

Also, this is the transgender visibility thread, not the nazi rally to burn trans information.

Furthermore I am not arguing that gender is an internal sense of self. That is what the transphobes are arguing. How could you possibly read the thread and think that. I am arguing gender is a social construction and the qualities that make someone transgender are innate like eye color or left handedness.

White people can't be woke?

Why do you think those on the right are wrong for thinking most woke people are not independent thinkers? Isn't the greatest instance of woke thinking the BLM movement and isn't BLM a great example of herd thinking since the most basic premise of BLM is that cops are racist towards black people and that is why they are dying at higher rates than other races? There is no way independent thinking could lead to every single one of those protestors/rioters to come to the conclusion that black people are killed by cops because cops are racist.

No, but that's not how they are used. The puberty blockers are given for just a few years so that they can be stopped in time to allow the body to still go through normal puberty. I believe that continuing puberty blockers for too long does lead to permanent changes. There's a window in which puberty can occur.

I don't personally prescribe these drugs so I don't know for sure, but I don't think they are given together. The hormones themselves should obviate the need for the pubertal blockers, and not everyone who starts on hormones has taken the blockers first.

Transgender is either a social construct or innate. Cannot be both.

No this is just flat out wrong. You could leave the word "self" off, but it's the trans activists that argue that gender is an "internal sense" that's intrinsic to one's nature.

Do you want a law making it illegal to treat children between the ages of 8-14 with puberty blockers?

Do you want a law making it illegal to treat children between the ages of 8-14 with hormones?

SB, you did not respond to my questions with your post so I still don't understand what you were talking about.

Pathetic and embarrassing response after all the discussion that’s been had. Let’s be real. You are rationalizing how trans is good because you get meaning for being an advocate.

Any sense that you are aligned with the truth at this point is purely delusion in your mind.

This is word salad without any meaning.