[PASSED] Affordable Transgender Hormone Therapy

[Morover]

OOC: Apologies, still learning terms and it didn't even occur to me that it may be offensive. Thanks for letting me know, I've been using that for a while and have probably made a fool of myself somewhere.

OOC: It's more annoying than offensive, though it's sometimes used by people who don't want to believe that being transgender (which reminds me, something I forgot to put in the feedback, you define transgender instead of transgender individual - "transgender" is grammatically an adjective, not a noun) is a real medical thing, and so refer to it as if it was some kind of cult or political movement.

OOC: Ah, okay. Thanks for letting me know, nonetheless.

Also, fixed that grammatical error.

[Christian Democrats]

The key difference, Ambassador, is that vaccination is not unsafe. Artificial hormones, on the other hand, increase risks for numerous health conditions, including but not limited to cancer, cardiovascular disease, sterility, obesity, gallstones, hyperkalemia, and polycythemia.

Imposing vaccines on healthy children is not unlike imposing fruits and vegetables on healthy children.

OOC:
I know this is in-character but, you keep saying that, and I don't think you honestly understand what those words mean.

Hormones used for HRT are universally bioidentical. That means that they are literally exactly the same as what a cis person's body normally produces. The sole extant difference is the fact that they were synthesized, or there was some other process used to make them, I don't really know, how specifically they're made, and it doesn't really matter. Your body is unable to tell the difference, because there is none.

Second, those risks are either, natural in cis people who have those hormones naturally, or due primarily to method of administration; for example, I take 6 milligrams of estradiol, that's literally just brand name estrogen in case you're about to scream about artificial hormones again, in pill form. Due to that fact, not the hormone itself, I am putting extra stress on my liver. This is the same sort of risk you take with literally any medication at all, and all this nonsensical outrage over things that happen with literally any medication without any concern is nothing but transphobic misdirection.

Your claim that hormone therapy simply elevates a person's background risk for certain medical disorders to the "natural" risk level of the other biological sex, to which the person wishes to transition, is factually inaccurate. Take, for example, a recent study on cardiovascular disease in transgender patients. As reported in the media:

The study found that transgender women, who are assigned the male sex at birth, were twice as likely as cisgender men or women to have the blood clot condition venous thromboembolism. Transgender women on hormone therapy were also found to be 80 to 90 percent more likely to have stroke or a heart attack than cisgender women.

. . .

In the past, studies measuring cardiovascular effects of estrogen therapy have been done on menopausal women and applied to transgender women. But the study of transgender women found significant differences, particularly for long-term use. Menopausal studies cited by the Kaiser researchers showed risks of cardiovascular illness declining over long-term use, but the Kaiser study found that risk increased for transgender women over time.

https://www.nbcnews.com/health/health-news/study-finds-health-risks-transgender-women-hormone-therapy-n890031

Recognition of real health risks is hardly "nonsensical outrage" or "transphobic misdirection."

Finally, we get to the last point about health. Mental health is a real fucking thing. If you break an arm, you get a fucking cast, if you've got severe depression, you take antidepressants. This whole argument is a complete dismissal of mental health, and it's absurd.

I agree with your premises. People who suffer physical illnesses or physical injuries (e.g., broken arms) should be restored to their original or natural physical state (e.g., unbroken arms) through appropriate treatment (e.g., "a fucking cast"). Likewise, people who suffer mental illnesses (e.g., depression) should be restored to their original or natural mental state (e.g., not depressed) through appropriate treatment (sometimes anti-depressants).

For transpeople, the alternative to transition is often either suicide or a life of abject suffering and self-repression. I would certainly hope that you consider those bad things. The alternative that you imply, while of course carefully dodging around to give yourself the veneer of plausible deniability when called out for it like I'm doing right now, is fucking conversion therapy. Which, as we've been over, is abusive, torturous, inhuman, and horrific. Do not try to say 'psychiatric treatment' when you mean conversion therapy. Trans people often undergo psychiatric treatment, and are often required to do so, especially children. Conversion therapy, or 'birth sex affirmation' or whatever the fuck you people want to call it is not psychiatric treatment, it's child abuse.

It's difficult for me to engage this passage because of its impenetrable newspeak. To paraphrase your words:

Concern for mental health promotes suicide.
Promoting self-affirmation is repressive.
Skepticism toward transition is conversion.
Skepticism toward human body modification is inhuman.
Mental health treatment for mental health conditions is abusive.

[Tinfect]

Your claim that hormone therapy simply elevates a person's background risk for certain medical disorders to the "natural" risk level of the other biological sex, to which the person wishes to transition, is factually inaccurate. Take, for example, a recent study on cardiovascular disease in transgender patients. As reported in the media:
[drivel]
https://www.nbcnews.com/health/health-news/study-finds-health-risks-transgender-women-hormone-therapy-n890031

Yeah, you see, that's bullshit. Believe it or not, news media which, in nearly all cases has biases and misinformation when reporting on scientific news, isn't a great source.

A study published in January 2019 found that trans women in their study experienced cardiovascular events at a rate of 2.3 per 1000 person-years, which is less than the risk rate associated with premenopausal cis women taking oral contraceptives: 3.5 per 1,000 person-years.

While almost HALF of the study’s subjects were dealing with “psychological stressors” and/or were smokers, which are significant risk factors for cardiac events, these risks were not accounted for in the study. Moreover, other well-known contributing risk factors (weight, sedentary lifestyle, cholesterol levels, drug and alcohol use, blood pressure levels, diabetic conditions, etc.) were not considered.

In other words, like almost all of such 'studies' trotted out by transphobes, there are severe methodological issues involved that render either the study itself, or the argument based upon it, utterly false.

I agree with your premises.

You don't actually, you make a frankly bizarre assumption about the purpose of medical treatment that is completely unsupported and utterly presumptuous, especially when regarding mental health.

Likewise, people who suffer mental illnesses (e.g., depression) should be restored to their original or natural mental state (e.g., not depressed) through appropriate treatment (sometimes anti-depressants).

In this case, the 'original and natural' state, is the depression. We identify that state as a problem, as it ever so slightly seriously impacts one's life and wellbeing, and treat it as-such. This perception that mental illness is something 'unnatural' that must be returned to 'normalcy' is a toxic viewpoint that has historically lead to horrific abuses of the mentally ill.

It's difficult for me to engage this passage because of its impenetrable newspeak.

To accuse me of redefining words as I please, and then proceed to do exactly the same to reach a conclusion that is manifestly opposite to what I was saying is, honestly, quite typical of your sort. Let's break it down.

Concern for mental health promotes suicide.

I didn't say this. I said:

For transpeople, the alternative to transition is often either suicide or a life of abject suffering and self-repression.

Because, guess what, it is. People die because they are restricted from accessing transition related services. I would be fucking dead, for years now, if I hadn't been able to transition. I lived 18 years of my life forcibly suppressing any aspect of my identity that I, or others, considered 'deviant' from what was expected of me. Suffice it to say that I was not a happy child.

Promoting self-affirmation is repressive.

I didn't say this. I said:

Conversion therapy, or 'birth sex affirmation' or whatever the fuck you people want to call it is not psychiatric treatment, it's child abuse.

Because it's not 'self-affirmation', it's exactly the opposite. It is telling children that their identities are meaningless and that they should therefore live as something they are not. Trans people are the gender we say we are. We have always been and always will be. Forcing someone to reject who they are and accept who you say they are is most distinctly not 'self-affirmation'.

Skepticism toward transition is conversion.

I didn't say this. I said:

The alternative that you imply, [...] is fucking conversion therapy.

I said that because it's true. There's a difference between being 'skeptical' and spouting nonsense that flies in the face of literally all available evidence to someone with firsthand experience of exactly the opposite of what you're saying. The only alternative you offer, that anyone offers, because it's the only other 'option', is conversion therapy. Whatever name they use for it, it remains conversion therapy.

Skepticism toward human body modification is inhuman.

I didn't say this, I said:

[...] Conversion therapy. Which, as we've been over, is abusive, torturous, inhuman, and horrific.

I was talking about fucking conversion therapy. 'Skepticism' about well-established, effective, and routine medical procedures is as valid as 'skepticism' that the earth goes around the sun. Besides that, it's none of your damn business what people do to their bodies, whether they're getting a tattoo, or getting SRS.

Mental health treatment for mental health conditions is abusive.

I didn't say this, I said:

Trans people often undergo psychiatric treatment, and are often required to do so, especially children. Conversion therapy, [...] is not psychiatric treatment, it's child abuse.

Again, I said this because it's true. I know people who are, as we speak, being forced through a slow process of psychological evaluation to make sure they're really trans, and I know trans people who went through that system, only for it to be decided by said system that they don't deserve the help they need. I've talked to people who would go on to commit suicide because of it.

When you talk about 'psychiatric therapy' you're using a clever sense of the words that devalues any kind of actual psychiatric therapy, in favor of conversion therapy. You're the one using newspeak here, not me. When I refer to psychiatric therapy, I am referring to the common system of gatekeeping and forced psychological evaluation that many trans people go through; I am referring to the many specialists with the subject matter that people see to help them figure out where their identities lie, whether cis or trans. I'm talking about commonplace procedures.

You're talking about fucking conversion therapy.

In other words, CD, when I say something, I know what I'm talking about and I say exactly what I fucking mean to say. If you want to make me say something stupid, at least have the courtesy to make me actually say it, instead of just fabricating words wholecloth and assigning them to me.

[Kyoki Chudoku]

An eyepatched woman entered the chamber, a tally-mark scar on her left cheek and a series of notes in her hands. The Chudokuren ambassador, Tokiko Suou, took her seat and let out a weary sigh as she read through the papers. The first, from the nation’s head of medical affairs, provided various statistics from limited Chudokuren studies into these matters. Most Chudokuren psychological research was currently devoted to undoing damage caused by the Nightmare War, so very little showed up on this particular topic. The sole exception was a male soldier who had apparently been rushed through flash-imprinting, meaning that numerous falsified memories existed of him as a female for all of his life and conflicted directly with his actual experiences- far from a typical case of the subject of the resolution, and given his continually psychotic mental status, irrelevant to the actual topic. The second note was from Hanabi, head of security, who had simply underlined the portion of the proposal relating to punishment in ref ink and written “So we have to supply this to traitors now!?” beneath. Finally, the last sheet of paper was written in Chudokuren comic form, with the signature style of Gikochinai, head of media and cultural affairs. Tokiko let out a chuckle at the punchline, glad to have something entertaining to think about today.

Her examination done, Tokiko stood and cleared her throat. “I understand the reasoning behind this proposal. There are, however, issues. Firstly, you demand affordability and easy access to substances which are not, at this time, especially prominent for us. Secondly, you demand that we supply these substances to prisoners, in keeping with avoiding taking away hormones as punishment. In other words, every prison must now additionally supplied with medically unnecessary substances, enough for a constant supply. Finally, the idea of being forced to give people hormones regardless of potential side effects is dangerous. For example, what about situations in which supplying additional hormones may result in substantial illness? I’m not a doctor myself, but I believe that under the regulations imposed by this resolution, you would effectively be forced to allow someone to become dangerously ill as long as they are capable of providing consent. Those are the issues Kyoki Chudoku has with this proposal.” Knowing that her first point was rather weak, Tokiko sat down and hoped that at very least, the lattermost would be convincing to some degree. She had no personal objection to the therapy itself- as if she had time to care about these things. It was mainly the cost that would be imposed that concerned her and her associates.

[Christian Democrats]

Your claim that hormone therapy simply elevates a person's background risk for certain medical disorders to the "natural" risk level of the other biological sex, to which the person wishes to transition, is factually inaccurate. Take, for example, a recent study on cardiovascular disease in transgender patients. As reported in the media:
[drivel]
https://www.nbcnews.com/health/health-news/study-finds-health-risks-transgender-women-hormone-therapy-n890031

Yeah, you see, that's bullshit. Believe it or not, news media which, in nearly all cases has biases and misinformation when reporting on scientific news, isn't a great source.

A study published in January 2019 found that trans women in their study experienced cardiovascular events at a rate of 2.3 per 1000 person-years, which is less than the risk rate associated with premenopausal cis women taking oral contraceptives: 3.5 per 1,000 person-years.

While almost HALF of the study’s subjects were dealing with “psychological stressors” and/or were smokers, which are significant risk factors for cardiac events, these risks were not accounted for in the study. Moreover, other well-known contributing risk factors (weight, sedentary lifestyle, cholesterol levels, drug and alcohol use, blood pressure levels, diabetic conditions, etc.) were not considered.

In other words, like almost all of such 'studies' trotted out by transphobes, there are severe methodological issues involved that render either the study itself, or the argument based upon it, utterly false.

I agree with your premises.

You don't actually, you make a frankly bizarre assumption about the purpose of medical treatment that is completely unsupported and utterly presumptuous, especially when regarding mental health.

Likewise, people who suffer mental illnesses (e.g., depression) should be restored to their original or natural mental state (e.g., not depressed) through appropriate treatment (sometimes anti-depressants).

In this case, the 'original and natural' state, is the depression. We identify that state as a problem, as it ever so slightly seriously impacts one's life and wellbeing, and treat it as-such. This perception that mental illness is something 'unnatural' that must be returned to 'normalcy' is a toxic viewpoint that has historically lead to horrific abuses of the mentally ill.

It's difficult for me to engage this passage because of its impenetrable newspeak.

To accuse me of redefining words as I please, and then proceed to do exactly the same to reach a conclusion that is manifestly opposite to what I was saying is, honestly, quite typical of your sort. Let's break it down.

Concern for mental health promotes suicide.

I didn't say this. I said:

For transpeople, the alternative to transition is often either suicide or a life of abject suffering and self-repression.

Because, guess what, it is. People die because they are restricted from accessing transition related services. I would be fucking dead, for years now, if I hadn't been able to transition. I lived 18 years of my life forcibly suppressing any aspect of my identity that I, or others, considered 'deviant' from what was expected of me. Suffice it to say that I was not a happy child.

Promoting self-affirmation is repressive.

I didn't say this. I said:

Conversion therapy, or 'birth sex affirmation' or whatever the fuck you people want to call it is not psychiatric treatment, it's child abuse.

Because it's not 'self-affirmation', it's exactly the opposite. It is telling children that their identities are meaningless and that they should therefore live as something they are not. Trans people are the gender we say we are. We have always been and always will be. Forcing someone to reject who they are and accept who you say they are is most distinctly not 'self-affirmation'.

Skepticism toward transition is conversion.

I didn't say this. I said:

The alternative that you imply, [...] is fucking conversion therapy.

I said that because it's true. There's a difference between being 'skeptical' and spouting nonsense that flies in the face of literally all available evidence to someone with firsthand experience of exactly the opposite of what you're saying. The only alternative you offer, that anyone offers, because it's the only other 'option', is conversion therapy. Whatever name they use for it, it remains conversion therapy.

Skepticism toward human body modification is inhuman.

I didn't say this, I said:

[...] Conversion therapy. Which, as we've been over, is abusive, torturous, inhuman, and horrific.

I was talking about fucking conversion therapy. 'Skepticism' about well-established, effective, and routine medical procedures is as valid as 'skepticism' that the earth goes around the sun. Besides that, it's none of your damn business what people do to their bodies, whether they're getting a tattoo, or getting SRS.

Mental health treatment for mental health conditions is abusive.

I didn't say this, I said:

Trans people often undergo psychiatric treatment, and are often required to do so, especially children. Conversion therapy, [...] is not psychiatric treatment, it's child abuse.

Again, I said this because it's true. I know people who are, as we speak, being forced through a slow process of psychological evaluation to make sure they're really trans, and I know trans people who went through that system, only for it to be decided by said system that they don't deserve the help they need. I've talked to people who would go on to commit suicide because of it.

When you talk about 'psychiatric therapy' you're using a clever sense of the words that devalues any kind of actual psychiatric therapy, in favor of conversion therapy. You're the one using newspeak here, not me. When I refer to psychiatric therapy, I am referring to the common system of gatekeeping and forced psychological evaluation that many trans people go through; I am referring to the many specialists with the subject matter that people see to help them figure out where their identities lie, whether cis or trans. I'm talking about commonplace procedures.

You're talking about fucking conversion therapy.

In other words, CD, when I say something, I know what I'm talking about and I say exactly what I fucking mean to say. If you want to make me say something stupid, at least have the courtesy to make me actually say it, instead of just fabricating words wholecloth and assigning them to me.

This diatribe isn't persuasive. It's boorish (e.g., "that's bullshit"), it cites a biased source (TransAdvocate), and it's full of bald assertions (e.g., "I know what I'm talking about"). I would be more than happy to engage in a reasoned discussion when you're willing to do so.

At this time, I stand by the position that artificial hormones, dangerous to health, should not be imposed on children.

EDIT: The current version of this proposal contains a consent provision that seems adequate.

[Kenmoria]

(OOC: Your disgusted clause doesn’t flow correctly, since you haven’t previously established what ‘these rights’ are. Also, and I recognise this could be considered trivial, a PT nation won’t have a way of obtaining safe hormones, no matter what the government does.)

[Tinfect]

This diatribe isn't persuasive. It's boorish (e.g., "that's bullshit"), it cites a biased source (TransAdvocate), and it's full of bald assertions (e.g., "I know what I'm talking about"). I would be more than happy to engage in a reasoned discussion when you're willing to do so.

OOC:
Get over yourself you fucking child. You were called out on your bullshit and you're playing victim, hiding behind a thin veneer of 'civility'.

[Vojesayets Nikeyia]

This diatribe isn't persuasive. It's boorish (e.g., "that's bullshit"), it cites a biased source (TransAdvocate), and it's full of bald assertions (e.g., "I know what I'm talking about"). I would be more than happy to engage in a reasoned discussion when you're willing to do so.

OOC:
Get over yourself you fucking child. You were called out on your bullshit and you're playing victim, hiding behind a thin veneer of 'civility'.

Says the tranny

[Tinfect]

OOC:
Get over yourself you fucking child. You were called out on your bullshit and you're playing victim, hiding behind a thin veneer of 'civility'.

Says the tranny

Congratulations, you've successfully identified that I am, in fact, a filthy tranny faggot. Well done. Go chew on a curb.

[American Pere Housh]

Access to Hormonal Therapy
Civil Rights | Significant



The World Assembly,

Reaffirming that gender identity is not a valid reason for discrimination

Disgusted that some nations refuse to grant transgender people these rights and needs.

Understanding that, for many transgender people, access to sex hormones is vital to one's sense of identity.

Believing that any decision to use sex hormones should be up to the individual.

Hereby,

Defines, for the purposes of this resolution, a transgender individual as an individual whose gender identity does not match the sex the individual was assigned at birth.

Defines, for the purposes of this resolution, sex hormones (henceforth known as "hormones") as a chemical which is naturally produced by the body, which gives the body secondary sex characteristics.

Defines, for the purposes of this resolution, hormone therapy as the use of hormones to intentionally change the balance of hormones, in order to more accurately represent an individual's gender identity.

Requires all member-states to legalize hormone therapy for all individuals capable of consenting to the treatment.

Requires all member-states to have an affordable, easy-to-access way for its transgender population to access hormones.

Forbids any member-state from keeping hormones from a transgender person as punishment or as part of a punishment for a crime.

Forbids any member-state from forcing an individual to undergo hormonal therapy.

IC: "Somewhat surprised this specific subject hasn't been legislated on, thus far."

OOC: I know that I have several other drafts up on the forums currently, but I do want to get this out there while it's still fresh on my mind. This will likely be my last draft for a bit, but I don't want to wait too long on it.

That being said, I did do a bit of research on the subject, but I'm by no means an expert on it. I believe I got most things correct, but there is a rather sizeable chance that this is somewhat inaccurate. If somebody with more experience in this area could give me some insight, that would be greatly appreciated.

"My government is will remain neutral since they're so few transgender people in my country."

[Lamoni]

This diatribe isn't persuasive. It's boorish (e.g., "that's bullshit"), it cites a biased source (TransAdvocate), and it's full of bald assertions (e.g., "I know what I'm talking about"). I would be more than happy to engage in a reasoned discussion when you're willing to do so.

OOC:
Get over yourself you fucking child. You were called out on your bullshit and you're playing victim, hiding behind a thin veneer of 'civility'.

*** Warning for Flaming ***

You've been here long enough to know that it is not in your best interest to directly insult other players, Tinfect. Take a calming breath, back away for a bit, do what you need to in order to respond to others without going against the rules.

OOC:
Get over yourself you fucking child. You were called out on your bullshit and you're playing victim, hiding behind a thin veneer of 'civility'.

Says the tranny

*** Warning for Flaming ***

You know the rules call for CIVIL debates in NSG, yes? Keep this up, and your time here will be short, puppet or no.

[Grenartia]

Yeah, you see, that's bullshit. Believe it or not, news media which, in nearly all cases has biases and misinformation when reporting on scientific news, isn't a great source.



In other words, like almost all of such 'studies' trotted out by transphobes, there are severe methodological issues involved that render either the study itself, or the argument based upon it, utterly false.



You don't actually, you make a frankly bizarre assumption about the purpose of medical treatment that is completely unsupported and utterly presumptuous, especially when regarding mental health.



In this case, the 'original and natural' state, is the depression. We identify that state as a problem, as it ever so slightly seriously impacts one's life and wellbeing, and treat it as-such. This perception that mental illness is something 'unnatural' that must be returned to 'normalcy' is a toxic viewpoint that has historically lead to horrific abuses of the mentally ill.



To accuse me of redefining words as I please, and then proceed to do exactly the same to reach a conclusion that is manifestly opposite to what I was saying is, honestly, quite typical of your sort. Let's break it down.



I didn't say this. I said:

Because, guess what, it is. People die because they are restricted from accessing transition related services. I would be fucking dead, for years now, if I hadn't been able to transition. I lived 18 years of my life forcibly suppressing any aspect of my identity that I, or others, considered 'deviant' from what was expected of me. Suffice it to say that I was not a happy child.



I didn't say this. I said:

Because it's not 'self-affirmation', it's exactly the opposite. It is telling children that their identities are meaningless and that they should therefore live as something they are not. Trans people are the gender we say we are. We have always been and always will be. Forcing someone to reject who they are and accept who you say they are is most distinctly not 'self-affirmation'.



I didn't say this. I said:

I said that because it's true. There's a difference between being 'skeptical' and spouting nonsense that flies in the face of literally all available evidence to someone with firsthand experience of exactly the opposite of what you're saying. The only alternative you offer, that anyone offers, because it's the only other 'option', is conversion therapy. Whatever name they use for it, it remains conversion therapy.



I didn't say this, I said:

I was talking about fucking conversion therapy. 'Skepticism' about well-established, effective, and routine medical procedures is as valid as 'skepticism' that the earth goes around the sun. Besides that, it's none of your damn business what people do to their bodies, whether they're getting a tattoo, or getting SRS.



I didn't say this, I said:

Again, I said this because it's true. I know people who are, as we speak, being forced through a slow process of psychological evaluation to make sure they're really trans, and I know trans people who went through that system, only for it to be decided by said system that they don't deserve the help they need. I've talked to people who would go on to commit suicide because of it.

When you talk about 'psychiatric therapy' you're using a clever sense of the words that devalues any kind of actual psychiatric therapy, in favor of conversion therapy. You're the one using newspeak here, not me. When I refer to psychiatric therapy, I am referring to the common system of gatekeeping and forced psychological evaluation that many trans people go through; I am referring to the many specialists with the subject matter that people see to help them figure out where their identities lie, whether cis or trans. I'm talking about commonplace procedures.

You're talking about fucking conversion therapy.

In other words, CD, when I say something, I know what I'm talking about and I say exactly what I fucking mean to say. If you want to make me say something stupid, at least have the courtesy to make me actually say it, instead of just fabricating words wholecloth and assigning them to me.

This diatribe isn't persuasive. It's boorish (e.g., "that's bullshit"), it cites a biased source (TransAdvocate)

Which does include a persuasive argument for why the study you cited should be disregarded, but you didn't even pay attention to that.

, and it's full of bald assertions (e.g., "I know what I'm talking about").

Well, she does, by virtue of the fact that she has firsthand experience.

I would be more than happy to engage in a reasoned discussion when you're willing to do so.

Translation: "Why don't you just fucking agree with me, instead of challenging my preconceptions with facts and logic?!"

At this time, I stand by the position that artificial hormones, dangerous to health, should not be imposed on children.

As has already been stated, they are not artificial, they are identical to the hormones present in your body right now, any health risks associated with them pale in comparison to their health benefits, and nobody is proposing to give 4 year olds estrogen or testosterone.

Stop being disingenuous.

EDIT: The current version of this proposal contains a consent provision that seems adequate.

At least you can concede something.

IC: "Somewhat surprised this specific subject hasn't been legislated on, thus far."

OOC: I know that I have several other drafts up on the forums currently, but I do want to get this out there while it's still fresh on my mind. This will likely be my last draft for a bit, but I don't want to wait too long on it.

That being said, I did do a bit of research on the subject, but I'm by no means an expert on it. I believe I got most things correct, but there is a rather sizeable chance that this is somewhat inaccurate. If somebody with more experience in this area could give me some insight, that would be greatly appreciated.

"My government is will remain neutral since they're so few transgender people in my country."

With all due respect, ambassador, but what does the number of transgender people in your country have to do with assuring their human rights?

I am genuinely baffled.

[United Massachusetts]

Access to Hormonal Therapy
Civil Rights | Significant


The World Assembly,

Reaffirming that gender identity is not a valid reason for discrimination (Is the denial of hormone therapy, bad as it is, best phrased as a discrimination issue? If so, why wouldn't it be covered under GA 35?)

Disgusted that some nations refuse to grant transgender people these rights and needs. (You haven't yet established what these rights and needs are. As written, this doesn't quite make sense.)

Understanding that, for many transgender people, access to sex hormones is vital to one's sense of identity. (Place this above the former clause)

Believing that any decision to use sex hormones should be up to the individual. (Good. This could be phrased more neatly)

Hereby,

Defines, for the purposes of this resolution, a transgender individual as an individual whose gender identity does not match the sex the individual was assigned at birth. (We're not sure this definition is entirely necessary, particularly considering that the phrase isn't used in the rest of the resolution, and a similar phrase "transgender person" is only used once)

Defines, for the purposes of this resolution, sex hormones (henceforth known as "hormones") as a chemical which is naturally produced by the body, which gives the body secondary sex characteristics. (This is a bit clunky, and could probably be combined with the clause below)

Defines, for the purposes of this resolution, hormone therapy as the use of hormones to intentionally change the balance of hormones, in order to more accurately represent an individual's gender identity. (This is good. My only concerns here are grammatical.)

Requires all member-states to legalize hormone therapy for all individuals capable of consenting to the treatment. (Good.)

Requires all member-states to have an affordable, easy-to-access way for its transgender population to access hormones. (How, exactly? The WA does not have a bottomless pool of money to spend. It's also worth noting that member states are already required to provide "full health services coverage." Thus, if you were to include in the definition of hormone therapy that it is a vital medical treatment, the provisions of GA 97 would apply to hormone therapy. We recommend this route. This clause can also probably be combined with the former clause.)

Forbids any member-state from keeping hormones from a transgender person as punishment or as part of a punishment for a crime. (Good.)

Forbids any member-state from forcing an individual to undergo hormonal therapy. (This is already true of medicine writ large and established in other WA resolutions. We're not sure why it should be included.)

"We are in favour of this resolution. Trans rights are human rights, and that ought to be affirmed.

Having said that, we intend to propose a series of edits today outlining ways to improve the resolution, and perhaps make it more powerfully succinct. In the meantime, I'm afraid our delegation has to depart for now."

the bishop scuffles out of the room

OOC: It's worth remembering that in these debates, civility is important but isn't everything. These are vital issues concerning real people's lives, and if people need to use emotional language, then so be it -- these are emotional topics. That is all I'll say for now.

[American Pere Housh]

This diatribe isn't persuasive. It's boorish (e.g., "that's bullshit"), it cites a biased source (TransAdvocate)

Which does include a persuasive argument for why the study you cited should be disregarded, but you didn't even pay attention to that.

, and it's full of bald assertions (e.g., "I know what I'm talking about").

Well, she does, by virtue of the fact that she has firsthand experience.

I would be more than happy to engage in a reasoned discussion when you're willing to do so.

Translation: "Why don't you just fucking agree with me, instead of challenging my preconceptions with facts and logic?!"

At this time, I stand by the position that artificial hormones, dangerous to health, should not be imposed on children.

As has already been stated, they are not artificial, they are identical to the hormones present in your body right now, any health risks associated with them pale in comparison to their health benefits, and nobody is proposing to give 4 year olds estrogen or testosterone.

Stop being disingenuous.

EDIT: The current version of this proposal contains a consent provision that seems adequate.

At least you can concede something.

"My government is will remain neutral since they're so few transgender people in my country."

With all due respect, ambassador, but what does the number of transgender people in your country have to do with assuring their human rights?

I am genuinely baffled.

"What human right are we talking about? My government may forced to accept transgenderism but my government will not pay one cent to them to pay for all their procedures including hormone treatment."
Ambassador Jonathan Delacroix

[Separatist Peoples]

Which does include a persuasive argument for why the study you cited should be disregarded, but you didn't even pay attention to that.



Well, she does, by virtue of the fact that she has firsthand experience.



Translation: "Why don't you just fucking agree with me, instead of challenging my preconceptions with facts and logic?!"



As has already been stated, they are not artificial, they are identical to the hormones present in your body right now, any health risks associated with them pale in comparison to their health benefits, and nobody is proposing to give 4 year olds estrogen or testosterone.

Stop being disingenuous.



At least you can concede something.



With all due respect, ambassador, but what does the number of transgender people in your country have to do with assuring their human rights?

I am genuinely baffled.

"What human right are we talking about? My government may forced to accept transgenderism but my government will not pay one cent to them to pay for all their procedures including hormone treatment."
Ambassador Jonathan Delacroix

"You will if you wish to remain in compliance and this passes, ambassador."

[Grenartia]

Which does include a persuasive argument for why the study you cited should be disregarded, but you didn't even pay attention to that.



Well, she does, by virtue of the fact that she has firsthand experience.



Translation: "Why don't you just fucking agree with me, instead of challenging my preconceptions with facts and logic?!"



As has already been stated, they are not artificial, they are identical to the hormones present in your body right now, any health risks associated with them pale in comparison to their health benefits, and nobody is proposing to give 4 year olds estrogen or testosterone.

Stop being disingenuous.



At least you can concede something.



With all due respect, ambassador, but what does the number of transgender people in your country have to do with assuring their human rights?

I am genuinely baffled.

"What human right are we talking about? My government may forced to accept transgenderism but my government will not pay one cent to them to pay for all their procedures including hormone treatment."
Ambassador Jonathan Delacroix

You don't sound very neutral on the issue, ambassador. Also, it isn't an "-ism".

[Bears Armed]

Could also easily fit into Healthcare, given that HRT is in RL a healthcare thing.

Would you recommend me put it in healthcare? I think it fits as-is, but I did consider healthcare as a category, and would be more than willing to change it.

OOC
Mandating that member nations must allow the use of these drugs, and can not withhold them from prisoners = Civil Rights: Mandates about the affordability of the drugs = Healthcare, or maybe Social Justice, depending on how that affordability is to be managed. It would help if you aimed more intensively at one or the other of those approaches.
If you do stick with a category that has strengths rather than areas-of-effect then, considering the very low proportion of the population that's likely to be affected significantly in most nations, I'm not convinced that this qualifies as more than 'Mild' overall.

[Tras Aus]

OOC: Non-reconstructive, cosmetic surgery and enhancing drugs will never be covered by the State. Moreover, a policy affecting less than half of 1% of the population is not "significant".

[Separatist Peoples]

OOC: Non-reconstructive, cosmetic surgery and enhancing drugs will never be covered by the State. Moreover, a policy affecting less than half of 1% of the population is not "significant".

OOC: Scope of the means of executing that policy is considered. Significant is not prima facie incorrect as a strength.

[Araraukar]

I lived 18 years of my life forcibly suppressing any aspect of my identity that I, or others, considered 'deviant' from what was expected of me. Suffice it to say that I was not a happy child.

OOC:

28 years here. I was a happy child, actually, once I got willful enough to fight against having to use pantyhose and skirts. Puberty start was for me the ultimate betrayal of my body. Been battling depression ever since. I'm not on HRT currently (had some unrelated hormone issues that needed to be dealt with first; turned out I have a lazy thyroid gland and one overactive ovary - the medication for both being, shock, shock, horror, horror, artificially produced hormones!), but the mental transition (using male pronouns in English, introducing myself even in RL to people as Joel, having friends and family refer to me as Joel, etc.) has helped tons. HRT is still in the plans, just needed to get the already existing ones sorted out (if all goes well with the treatment, maybe later this year or early next year, we'll see).

I know people who are, as we speak, being forced through a slow process of psychological evaluation to make sure they're really trans

I went through that evaluation, which took several months, hours-long interviews where every aspect of your life is gone through in humiliating detail (like, seriously, normally people would just simply refuse to answer some of the questions, but you have no choice if you're being evaluated), a thousand+ multiple choice questions answered on questionnaires that probe your mental stability and personality and such, and a bloody stupid ancient relic of an ink blot test. As a reward I do have the official diagnosis of being trans, which means anyone claiming trans people aren't real, can take a flying leap off a cliff and try to convince themselves that gravity isn't real because it's just a theory.

At this time, I stand by the position that artificial hormones, dangerous to health, should not be imposed on children.

OOC: Well, the hormones aren't dangerous to health so that's okay, then. Also, if you think HRT is forced on children, you've failed biology. They're called sex hormones because they give the secondary sexual characteristics. Which normally happens during puberty. So children wouldn't be given HRT to begin with. Would you agree to someone being allowed hormone blockers (which aren't hormones) until they grow old enough to decide which set of sex hormones they'd like to go through? Artificially induced puberties happen all the time in cis teens, whose ovaries or testes for some reason or another aren't producing or aren't producing enough of the correct hormones, so don't try to make this a trans kid issue only.

In addition to which, PRA lets parents decide on their kids' consent, so your argument is null in that effect anyway. Unless you feel this falls under #91 and #124, in which case your argument is null again in that this is already covered.

General IC comment: "Given that the Most Glorious and Beloved Leader¹ of the Grand Nation of Araraukar is transgender theirself, it should be fairly obvious that we are in support of any and all trans rights proposals. As others have already detailed, however, the exact language needs some work. As for the decision to focus on any given aspect of this, people's rights usually rank higher in the priority list than their means."

OOC ¹note: If that sounds something like the North Korean despot, it's intentional, though in Araraukar's case it's very much the opposite of the personal cult in that the Leader (publicly only known by the title) could (and actually often does) walk through the streets of the capital unrecognized. Due to Araraukar's history with religion in general, they (not female, not male, not inter, not genderfluid or genderqueer but "actual transgender" in that they fall between male and female and identify as something between the two) are doing everything they can to avoid being made the head of a cult.

[Morover]

An eyepatched woman entered the chamber, a tally-mark scar on her left cheek and a series of notes in her hands. The Chudokuren ambassador, Tokiko Suou, took her seat and let out a weary sigh as she read through the papers. The first, from the nation’s head of medical affairs, provided various statistics from limited Chudokuren studies into these matters. Most Chudokuren psychological research was currently devoted to undoing damage caused by the Nightmare War, so very little showed up on this particular topic. The sole exception was a male soldier who had apparently been rushed through flash-imprinting, meaning that numerous falsified memories existed of him as a female for all of his life and conflicted directly with his actual experiences- far from a typical case of the subject of the resolution, and given his continually psychotic mental status, irrelevant to the actual topic. The second note was from Hanabi, head of security, who had simply underlined the portion of the proposal relating to punishment in ref ink and written “So we have to supply this to traitors now!?” beneath. Finally, the last sheet of paper was written in Chudokuren comic form, with the signature style of Gikochinai, head of media and cultural affairs. Tokiko let out a chuckle at the punchline, glad to have something entertaining to think about today.

Her examination done, Tokiko stood and cleared her throat. “I understand the reasoning behind this proposal. There are, however, issues. Firstly, you demand affordability and easy access to substances which are not, at this time, especially prominent for us. Secondly, you demand that we supply these substances to prisoners, in keeping with avoiding taking away hormones as punishment. In other words, every prison must now additionally supplied with medically unnecessary substances, enough for a constant supply. Finally, the idea of being forced to give people hormones regardless of potential side effects is dangerous. For example, what about situations in which supplying additional hormones may result in substantial illness? I’m not a doctor myself, but I believe that under the regulations imposed by this resolution, you would effectively be forced to allow someone to become dangerously ill as long as they are capable of providing consent. Those are the issues Kyoki Chudoku has with this proposal.” Knowing that her first point was rather weak, Tokiko sat down and hoped that at very least, the lattermost would be convincing to some degree. She had no personal objection to the therapy itself- as if she had time to care about these things. It was mainly the cost that would be imposed that concerned her and her associates.

"If the substances are not especially prominent for you, then you should have no problem supplying them to your citizens. Unless, of course, you mean that you cannot keep up with the demand, in which case I suggest that you bring in an independent supplier or suppliers and ensure that they either keep their prices low or you make up the difference for your citizens."

"And yes, I do mandate that prisoners be supplied with these substances. That's not going to change."

"Even if there are dangerous side effects to sex hormones, which isn't strictly true, if someone gives express consent, then yes, it should be required to supply them with those sex hormones. Ideally, if your healthcare system was anything up-to-standard, you'd be able to mitigate these 'dangerous' side effects of sex hormones, so it should be effectively a non-issue anyways."

---

Reaffirming that gender identity is not a valid reason for discrimination (Is the denial of hormone therapy, bad as it is, best phrased as a discrimination issue? If so, why wouldn't it be covered under GA 35?)

"Yes, I can see where you're coming from. I'll change 'discrimination' to 'deprivation of rights,' and can further change it in the future. I'd agree that discrimination is not necessarily the best term to use here."

Disgusted that some nations refuse to grant transgender people these rights and needs. (You haven't yet established what these rights and needs are. As written, this doesn't quite make sense.)

"I changed some stuff before that clause, and believed I fixed the errors that popped up as a result of those changes. Obviously, I missed some. I'll fix this so it makes sense (or, it even could be fixed automatically through me fixing the first preambulatory clause."

Understanding that, for many transgender people, access to sex hormones is vital to one's sense of identity. (Place this above the former clause)

"This clause is still in the process of being rewritten following concerns from the delegation in Araraukar, but when considering the changes, I'll also consider placement."

Believing that any decision to use sex hormones should be up to the individual. (Good. This could be phrased more neatly)

"I'll see what I can do."

Defines, for the purposes of this resolution, a transgender individual as an individual whose gender identity does not match the sex the individual was assigned at birth. (We're not sure this definition is entirely necessary, particularly considering that the phrase isn't used in the rest of the resolution, and a similar phrase "transgender person" is only used once)

"I do believe this definition to be necessary, but I will admit that there are some spots where 'transgender individual' could have been used as opposed to the language I used instead. I will also change the 'transgender person' to 'transgender individual.'"

Defines, for the purposes of this resolution, sex hormones (henceforth known as "hormones") as a chemical which is naturally produced by the body, which gives the body secondary sex characteristics. (This is a bit clunky, and could probably be combined with the clause below)

"You may be right, but I don't think that a combination of the definitions of 'sex hormones' and 'hormone therapy' to necessarily be appropriate to combine into one definition. I think that it's better to keep them separate and work on the definitions separately.

Requires all member-states to have an affordable, easy-to-access way for its transgender population to access hormones. (How, exactly? The WA does not have a bottomless pool of money to spend. It's also worth noting that member states are already required to provide "full health services coverage." Thus, if you were to include in the definition of hormone therapy that it is a vital medical treatment, the provisions of GA 97 would apply to hormone therapy. We recommend this route. This clause can also probably be combined with the former clause.)

"See, I'm avoiding defining hormone therapy as a vital medical treatment, especially in the definition, because so many nations do not believe hormone therapy to be a vital medication, and may use it as a claim for them to not be required to follow this proposal. Also, if, for whatever reason, GAR#97 is repealed, then it would essentially render this useless. Ideally, yes, that would be the way to go, but I feel that it is safer to keep it as-is."

Additionally, I don't think this should be combined with the previous clause, for clarities sake."

Forbids any member-state from forcing an individual to undergo hormonal therapy. (This is already true of medicine writ large and established in other WA resolutions. We're not sure why it should be included.)

"I believed I did a pretty good job scouring previously passed resolutions to make sure this didn't duplicate any - If you don't mind me asking, which specific resolution prohibited this?"

"We are in favour of this resolution. Trans rights are human rights, and that ought to be affirmed.

Having said that, we intend to propose a series of edits today outlining ways to improve the resolution, and perhaps make it more powerfully succinct. In the meantime, I'm afraid our delegation has to depart for now."

"I appreciate your support, ambassador. Hopefully we can improve this proposal greatly."

---

(OOC: Your disgusted clause doesn’t flow correctly, since you haven’t previously established what ‘these rights’ are. Also, and I recognise this could be considered trivial, a PT nation won’t have a way of obtaining safe hormones, no matter what the government does.)

OOC: As I mentioned to UM, it's leftover from the old preamble. I'll fix it, thanks for pointing it out.

As for PT nations, I honestly feel like that argument could be made for a lot of resolutions - there's not much I can do about it, without compromising the entire proposal. I don't necessarily know the history behind hormone therapy, but I assume that they weren't necessarily prevalent in the past, nor did many past nations even consider the idea. Again, this is just what I presume, but I can imagine that it's somewhat accurate.

"What human right are we talking about? My government may forced to accept transgenderism but my government will not pay one cent to them to pay for all their procedures including hormone treatment."
Ambassador Jonathan Delacroix

"Well, ambassador, if you're going to be so stubborn about it, I'll just scrap the entire resolution. Apologies for wasting your time."

Ambassador Jonathon Jer turns away, chuckling, "That was a joke, of course. Just because you don't want to follow a proposal isn't valid reason to not follow it, should it pass."

Would you recommend me put it in healthcare? I think it fits as-is, but I did consider healthcare as a category, and would be more than willing to change it.

OOC
Mandating that member nations must allow the use of these drugs, and can not withhold them from prisoners = Civil Rights: Mandates about the affordability of the drugs = Healthcare, or maybe Social Justice, depending on how that affordability is to be managed. It would help if you aimed more intensively at one or the other of those approaches.
If you do stick with a category that has strengths rather than areas-of-effect then, considering the very low proportion of the population that's likely to be affected significantly in most nations, I'm not convinced that this qualifies as more than 'Mild' overall.

OOC: I'll consider either changing category or strength. I feel that in most of my proposals, it does not strictly fit into one category or another, which can be rather inconvenient, but isn't the end of the world, I suppose.

Also, since I've gotten a few GenSec responses, I hope you don't mind me asking whether or not the concept of this proposal is legal? I understand it's fairly close to several other resolutions, such as GAR#91 and GAR#124, but I do believe it to be independent. Some more well-educated insight would be appreciated, though.

[United Massachusetts]

OOC: Non-reconstructive, cosmetic surgery and enhancing drugs will never be covered by the State. Moreover, a policy affecting less than half of 1% of the population is not "significant".

OOC: Scope of the means of executing that policy is considered. Significant is not prima facie incorrect as a strength.

OOC: I would still think strength leans mild (?), particularly because GA 97 already requires full health services. If the resolution is framed as more of closing a loophole, and if it's preamble were to emphasize existing strides made, I could see mild being appropriate. It seems to depend here on how the preamble is framed. Not really sure though at all.

Access to Hormonal Therapy
Civil Rights | Significant

The World Assembly, by the advice and consent of the delegates and member nations thereof, and by the authority of the same, hereby:

1. Submits the following as fact:
   1. Transgender and gender non-binary people are real.
   2. Their experiences are not the product of "mental illness," "confusion," "disease," or anything of the sort -- rather, their understanding of their relationship to the world in the lens of gender does not correspond with their biological sex.
   3. Their first-hand accounts of this understanding are real; each person is in the best position to understand and discern their own gender identity.
   4. Any distress arising from this real disconnect between sex and gender is referred to as gender dysphoria -- like any mental condition, it ought to be treated.
   5. Further, it ought to be treated in a manner that respects the fundamental facts: that transgender and non-binary individuals' experiences are real, and that their gender identity is not the same as their birth sex.
   6. One such way to resolve the distress is through hormone therapy, and the choice to pursue or not to pursue such treatment ought to rest firmly in the hands of the individual, rather than in the hands of the state.
2. Defines "hormone therapy" as a medical treatment involving the consumption of natural bodily hormones for the purposes of altering one's secondary sex characteristics to more accurately reflect their gender identity,
   
   
3. Affirms that member nations shall make the same provisions for the accessibility and affordability of hormone therapy that they would for any other similar, core medical treatment,
   
   
4. Prohibits member nations from imposing any unduly restriction upon the right of any transgender person, free or incarcerated, to obtain hormone therapy.

How about something that rights the truth clearly and firmly in stone? Here's my proposed edit. If you use my preamble, I'd appreciate a co-authorship. If not, that's cool too!

[Morover]

OOC: Scope of the means of executing that policy is considered. Significant is not prima facie incorrect as a strength.

OOC: I would still think strength leans mild (?), particularly because GA 97 already requires full health services. If the resolution is framed as more of closing a loophole, and if it's preamble were to emphasize existing strides made, I could see mild being appropriate. It seems to depend here on how the preamble is framed. Not really sure though at all.

Access to Hormonal Therapy
Civil Rights | Significant

The World Assembly, by the advice and consent of the delegates and member nations thereof, and by the authority of the same, hereby:

1. Submits the following as fact:
   1. Transgender and gender non-binary people are real.
   2. Their experiences are not the product of "mental illness," "confusion," "disease," or anything of the sort -- rather, their understanding of their relationship to the world in the lens of gender does not correspond with their biological sex.
   3. Their first-hand accounts of this understanding are real; each person is in the best position to understand and discern their own gender identity.
   4. Any distress arising from this real disconnect between sex and gender is referred to as gender dysphoria -- like any mental condition, it ought to be treated.
   5. Further, it ought to be treated in a manner that respects the fundamental facts: that transgender and non-binary individuals' experiences are real, and that their gender identity is not the same as their birth sex.
   6. One such way to resolve the distress is through hormone therapy, and the choice to pursue or not to pursue such treatment ought to rest firmly in the hands of the individual, rather than in the hands of the state.
2. Defines "hormone therapy" as a medical treatment involving the consumption of natural bodily hormones for the purposes of altering one's secondary sex characteristics to more accurately reflect their gender identity,
   
   
3. Affirms that member nations shall make the same provisions for the accessibility and affordability of hormone therapy that they would for any other similar, core medical treatment,
   
   
4. Prohibits member nations from imposing any unduly restriction upon the right of any transgender person, free or incarcerated, to obtain hormone therapy.

How about something that rights the truth clearly and firmly in stone? Here's my proposed edit. If you use my preamble, I'd appreciate a co-authorship. If not, that's cool too!

OOC: Well, you're certainly a more skilled author than me.

Your preamble is, without a doubt, more skillfully executed than mine was. I've always struggled with the preamble, but you obviously know what you're talking about.

Furthermore, though, you managed to implement your suggestions that I believed to be rather difficult to implement rather fancifully, and I almost feel foolish for not seeing it initially. Obviously, I'd love to use the entire thing, but I don't necessarily feel I should whilst only granting you a co-authorship.

Thank you for these edits. I'll implement them in any way that I can.

[Cekoviu]

We propose renaming the resolution to "Affordable Hormone Therapy for Transgender People" instead, which is somewhat less ambiguous.

[United Massachusetts]

OOC: Preambles are always hard. No need to sweat. Feel free to take as much or as little as you like -- you really developed the backbone of the operatives, which is where the heart of any resolution is.

We propose renaming the resolution to "Affordable Hormone Therapy for Transgender People" instead, which is somewhat less ambiguous.

That's probably a bit too long.