:facepalm:
No wonder people a desperately hoping for the Rapture or Zombie apocalypse.

We are in the End Times.

It seems to me that elective surgery or body modification should be something an adult (18+) makes.

Particularly troubling is the use of hormones on adolescents. Adolescents already have enough of that going on, and I am reasonably sure that we don't know all the effects this would have on brain development, etc.

:lol2:

If that were my post...you'd be all up in m'grill telling me how wrong I was.

And prolly make me change my mind.;)

:p:

As I understand it, for the most part, they are only doing hormone-blocking on adolescents. Which has its own set of side effects, but the intent is to put off the hormones until they're old enough to make the decision.

How can they make the right decision until nature has taken its course, until they've experienced the hormone's effects? :confused:

That's a decision in itself, and also can't be undone if it was the wrong one.

I am unsure there is a functional difference. You're still messing around with your brain before it's done developing.

There's a definite functional difference, because the end result of each path is very different. You could say that there's no difference at some level of abstraction, but at the functional level it's very different.

I'm not a doctor, so I can't argue with that.

I am, however, a process geek, and if a change to a process leads to damage, then the change (whether it is omission or commission) was undesirable.

If the process may be irreversibly going in the wrong direction, then the decision has to be made whether to risk some damage in the short term to get the information needed to correctly guide the process later.

There is definitely a difference between blocking hormones and taking hormones. One prevents puberty by blocking testosterone or estrogen - the other floods the system with testosterone or estrogen. Totally different things with totally different effects.

One major issue with giving hormone blockers prior to puberty is that it can actually lead to a worse transition outcome for those kids that do go through with transitioning. E.g: for a male to female transition, if the person never developed an adult size penis, they will only be able to have a very shallow vagina.

Seemingly, just from the vids I've seen, the best outcomes seem to be when someone transitions post puberty but while still young - so between the ages of 17 and 25.

As hard as it is for some youngsters whose gender dysphoria is extreme, probably their best chance of a reasonably happy outcome is therapy and support until they are a little more developed, and a lot of understanding from all around them that puberty is going to outright suck more for them than for the average youngster and maybe, with that additional time, explore other possible issues such as body dysmorphia which can easily be misread as gender dysphoria

The biggest problem though, as I see it, is the absolute dearth of research into the long term effects of such treatment. As Luce says, we just do not know enough about what this will do to these kids - what the implications might be when they get to their 30s and 40s and onwards.

The whole thing has become way too politicised - the whole non-binary thing in particular. The blurring of the categories of male and female is all very well at a behavioral or self-identity level - but from a medical perspective it has made it almost impossible for reasonable discourse. When physicians and therapists are being shouted down for saying that gender dysphoria is a disorder - it is ridiculous. How are they supposed to help trans people if they are no longer able to name the problem?

Meanwhile activists like the Queer Kids Stuff channel are promoting this woolly notion that it's all on a spectrum and we're all really non-binary - that there isn't really a binary at all - and quelle surprise suddenly every kid who doesn't completely conform to gender expectations is identifying as 'trans' and 'non-binary'


Thank god this wasn't a thing when I was a kid. I was a tomboy - if I'd been on social media when I was 12 I could easily have found myself going down the rabbithole.

I'm all for broadening what we mean by masculine and feminine so that people are not 'trapped' by gender expectations, and I have long been of the opinion that the supposedly innate differences between male and female brains have generally been overplayed - there are differences, but in terms of how that plays out in cognitive function has been been poorly understood and most of the research suggests that the socially constructed elements of gender are very important due to the primary characteristic of the brain being its elasticity - but dispensing with all distinction makes no sense whatsoever. Medically, psychologically and socially dangerous.

So that's what they did to me. :eek:

People don't seem to understand the flowchart on this.

Pathway #1 is that a person undergoes a normal puberty, turns 18, and then seeks medical intervention to attempt to reverse the hormonal effects, insomuch as this is possible. This isn't effective because some of the physiological effects of puberty are irreversible.

Pathway #2 is that the hormonal effects of puberty are delayed. This is physiologically no different than Olympic gymnasts having a delayed puberty. In this case, there are no physiological changes, and no irreversible changes of any kind. The person turns 18 and can seek medical intervention, without the added complication of attempting to reverse physiological changes that have already taken place.

...

There are no "transitioning" children-- this doesn't exist.

Interesting. Honest question: Do we know there are no side effects of delaying puberty?

And gymnasts really do that?