TDT 4: What the $#@! is a "womxn", anyways?

[Greed and Death]

Ding winner. Prepubetry sex differences are small and a large part of gender is cultural and worst case scenario here for letting the kid assume a different gender role is you have some funny photos. Worst case scenario for forcing a gender role on a kid is he develops depression, anxiety, and host of other mental illnesses and commit suicide in his teens or early adult life. So weighing worst case vs worst case if you child wants to explore a different gender identity let them.

Puberty brings up if you should use hormone treatment. As these tend to be more permanent I have hesitancy but as long as appropriate safeguards such as the dr.'s being licensed and a second opinion being sought see above and get the hormone treatment.

So you're advocating for child abuse then?

No I am advocating for the path that will produce the least amount of harm and is most likely to produce a productive laborer.

[The Rich Port]

Ding winner. Prepubetry sex differences are small and a large part of gender is cultural and worst case scenario here for letting the kid assume a different gender role is you have some funny photos. Worst case scenario for forcing a gender role on a kid is he develops depression, anxiety, and host of other mental illnesses and commit suicide in his teens or early adult life. So weighing worst case vs worst case if you child wants to explore a different gender identity let them.

Puberty brings up if you should use hormone treatment. As these tend to be more permanent I have hesitancy but as long as appropriate safeguards such as the dr.'s being licensed and a second opinion being sought see above and get the hormone treatment.

Puberty blockers are a good compromise for children since the effects aren't permanent.

Indeed.

I think a lot of people do have a valid concern about whether children can make fully informed choices, regardless of their education... At the same time, societal conservatives believe in physical abuse as punishment, so.

Me, I believe that children are often under-estimated. I can't tell you how many stories I've heard of parents finding their kids wearing the other gender's clothes, their parents trying to "correct" their behavior, and the kid becoming upset because... They want to wear those clothes, they don't identify as a boy or a girl.

America especially has this weird bizarre obsession with individualism, bordering on bastardization. Children have to take responsibility for their actions... But they also don't have the right to choose. Children are often treated as basically property or slaves without rights by many a well-meaning parent, and indeed, while the law often protects children from abuse, it can also deprive them and chain them to their parents, abusive or not.

It's why Macaulay Culkin had to sue his parents for emancipation because they kept spending all the money he made from his movies. Who does that money belong to: to him, or to his parents? When does their parents expressing authority and protection over their children end and abuse begin?

It's a fine line, to be sure, but one more easily traversed when parents are willing to respect their children's desires.

[Greed and Death]

Ding winner. Prepubetry sex differences are small and a large part of gender is cultural and worst case scenario here for letting the kid assume a different gender role is you have some funny photos. Worst case scenario for forcing a gender role on a kid is he develops depression, anxiety, and host of other mental illnesses and commit suicide in his teens or early adult life. So weighing worst case vs worst case if you child wants to explore a different gender identity let them.

Puberty brings up if you should use hormone treatment. As these tend to be more permanent I have hesitancy but as long as appropriate safeguards such as the dr.'s being licensed and a second opinion being sought see above and get the hormone treatment.

Thank you, this is exactly correct. I'm glad somebody's got some sense.

I am not even fully up to date as there are treatments that are less permanent that appear to delay permanent decisions until mid teens. That may well be preferable.

[Fahran]

Puberty blockers are a good compromise for children since the effects aren't permanent.

Giving puberty blockers to children can have quite a few deleterious effects, including bone mineralization and infertility. Really, I would steer clear of describing any child under the age of fourteen as trans in absolute terms given the high frequency of desistance. The safer presumption is that they're cis and experimenting with their gender or simply cis and taking an interest in activities and behaviors often associated with the opposite gender - because that's usually the case. Most kids who identify as trans-gender seem to grow out of it by the time they reach late adolescence - somehwere between 54% and 63%. We could also just decline from labeling the gendered behavior and identities of children under fourteen in absolute terms. If a child attains the age of fourteen, identifies as the opposite gender (or anything other than their assigned gender), and is not subthreshold, then you can still give them puberty blockers and begin the process of transitioning without much difficulty in most cases.

Source.

[Vassenor]

Puberty blockers are a good compromise for children since the effects aren't permanent.

Giving puberty blockers to children can have quite a few deleterious effects, including bone mineralization and infertility. Really, I would steer clear of describing any child under the age of fourteen as trans in absolute terms given the high frequency of desistance. The safer presumption is that they're cis and experimenting with their gender or simply cis and taking an interest in activities and behaviors often associated with the opposite gender - because that's usually the case. Most kids who identify as trans-gender seem to grow out of it by the time they reach late adolescence - somehwere between 54% and 63%. We could also just decline from labeling the gendered behavior and identities of children under fourteen in absolute terms. If a child attains the age of fourteen, identifies as the opposite gender (or anything other than their assigned gender), and is not subthreshold, then you can still give them puberty blockers and begin the process of transitioning without much difficulty in most cases.

Source.

So where does your source talk about the physical effects?

[Dumb Ideologies]

Puberty blockers are a good compromise for children since the effects aren't permanent.

Giving puberty blockers to children can have quite a few deleterious effects, including bone mineralization and infertility. Really, I would steer clear of describing any child under the age of fourteen as trans in absolute terms given the high frequency of desistance. The safer presumption is that they're cis and experimenting with their gender or simply cis and taking an interest in activities and behaviors often associated with the opposite gender - because that's usually the case. Most kids who identify as trans-gender seem to grow out of it by the time they reach late adolescence - somehwere between 54% and 63%. We could also just decline from labeling the gendered behavior and identities of children under fourteen in absolute terms. If a child attains the age of fourteen, identifies as the opposite gender (or anything other than their assigned gender), and is not subthreshold, then you can still give them puberty blockers and begin the process of transitioning without much difficulty in most cases.

Source.

Sounds reasonable enough.

[Auzkhia]

Tbh, the best solution with the whole thing on "transing kids" is to just simply stop assigning gender at birth. Is it a boy or a girl? Who cares? It's your child, love and support them no matter what body or identity they have.

This is a utopian pipe dream, but can't a tran dream? Especially when this would solve more problems than it would create?

[Fahran]

Sounds reasonable enough.

Hey, DI. I've missed your sassy comments in the RWDT.

I try to be reasonable when I'm not being a right-wing Pol Pot.

[Luminesa]

Giving puberty blockers to children can have quite a few deleterious effects, including bone mineralization and infertility. Really, I would steer clear of describing any child under the age of fourteen as trans in absolute terms given the high frequency of desistance. The safer presumption is that they're cis and experimenting with their gender or simply cis and taking an interest in activities and behaviors often associated with the opposite gender - because that's usually the case. Most kids who identify as trans-gender seem to grow out of it by the time they reach late adolescence - somehwere between 54% and 63%. We could also just decline from labeling the gendered behavior and identities of children under fourteen in absolute terms. If a child attains the age of fourteen, identifies as the opposite gender (or anything other than their assigned gender), and is not subthreshold, then you can still give them puberty blockers and begin the process of transitioning without much difficulty in most cases.
Source.

So where does your source talk about the physical effects?

How do you manage the stress of attacking every single person trying to have a decent conversation on the page? Everyone else here is actually discussing the issue. Why do you keep asking these asinine questions like nobody else knows what they are talking about? This is utterly ridiculous. Even people who agree with you, you can’t help but attack what they’re saying for some reason. Either you can actually be a part of the discussion or you can stop asking stupid questions you don’t read the answers for.

[Fahran]

Tbh, the best solution with the whole thing on "transing kids" is to just simply stop assigning gender at birth. Is it a boy or a girl? Who cares? It's your child, love it no matter what body or identity they have.

I imagine that could create a lot of problems. I think it's best to assign a gender at birth based on chromosomes, genitalia, and (when we can) brain gender. We can then rely on psychologists and other medical/scientific experts to inform how we treat children as they get older. If a child initially named Connor insists on wearing dresses and going by Sarah, we should react accordingly but in a way that allows for desistance and doesn't have long-term impacts on health before the child reaches early adolescence.

[Vassenor]

And for the record, the closest statistic I can find for "desistance" is maybe more like 45%.

Steensma, T D, Biemond, R, de Boer, F and Cohen-Kettenis P T (2011) Desisting and persisting gender dysphoria after childhood: A qualitative follow-up study in Clinical Child Psychology and Psychiatry Vol 16(4) pp. 499-516

[Cekoviu]

Puberty blockers are a good compromise for children since the effects aren't permanent.

Giving puberty blockers to children can have quite a few deleterious effects, including bone mineralization and infertility. Really, I would steer clear of describing any child under the age of fourteen as trans in absolute terms given the high frequency of desistance. The safer presumption is that they're cis and experimenting with their gender or simply cis and taking an interest in activities and behaviors often associated with the opposite gender - because that's usually the case. Most kids who identify as trans-gender seem to grow out of it by the time they reach late adolescence - somehwere between 54% and 63%. We could also just decline from labeling the gendered behavior and identities of children under fourteen in absolute terms. If a child attains the age of fourteen, identifies as the opposite gender (or anything other than their assigned gender), and is not subthreshold, then you can still give them puberty blockers and begin the process of transitioning without much difficulty in most cases.

Source.

That doesn't say anything about the effects of blockers, and with those effects, the costs and benefits would lead me to the conclusion that prescribing puberty blockers for children with a gender dysphoria diagnosis who exhibit consistent traits of gender dysphoria and are in an early stage of puberty is still preferable to not doing so.

[Luminesa]

Tbh, the best solution with the whole thing on "transing kids" is to just simply stop assigning gender at birth. Is it a boy or a girl? Who cares? It's your child, love and support them no matter what body or identity they have.

This is a utopian pipe dream, but can't a tran dream? Especially when this would solve more problems than it would create?

...The child is assigned a sex because it is required for legal documentation. Who cares? The government. The parents who have to care for either a boy or a girl. Their pediatricians who have expert knowledge on child development. Their teachers. Any legal representatives of the children. Real-life isn’t just some weird Sims simulator where it really doesn’t matter what you do, since in the end your random Sim is gonna wind-up on fire in the backyard for no reason.

[Rostavykhan]

But I thought we'd established that trans kid acceptance was child abuse and how dare people suggest otherwise.

What the fuck? Can you just argue like, normally for once?

You argue for what cannot be. How dare you speak against the T!

This will not do, this cannot be! Now quickly cease your bigotry!

[Cekoviu]

Tbh, the best solution with the whole thing on "transing kids" is to just simply stop assigning gender at birth. Is it a boy or a girl? Who cares? It's your child, love it no matter what body or identity they have.

I imagine that could create a lot of problems. I think it's best to assign a gender at birth based on chromosomes, genitalia, and (when we can) brain gender. We can then rely on psychologists and other medical/scientific experts to inform how we treat children as they get older. If a child initially named Connor insists on wearing dresses and going by Sarah, we should react accordingly but in a way that allows for desistance and doesn't have long-term impacts on health before the child reaches early adolescence.

Assigned gender at birth is better based on genitalia than the sex chromosomes, since the former more frequently reflects gender in later life (albeit by a fairly small margin). Neurological gender can't be accurately detected.

[Cekoviu]

What the fuck? Can you just argue like, normally for once?

You argue for what cannot be. How dare you speak against the T!

This will not do, this cannot be! Now quickly cease your bigotry!

Don't think for a minute that I'm on your team either, pal. I'm just sick of Vass's contentless shitposting.

[Auzkhia]

Tbh, the best solution with the whole thing on "transing kids" is to just simply stop assigning gender at birth. Is it a boy or a girl? Who cares? It's your child, love it no matter what body or identity they have.

I imagine that could create a lot of problems. I think it's best to assign a gender at birth based on chromosomes, genitalia, and (when we can) brain gender. We can then rely on psychologists and other medical/scientific experts to inform how we treat children as they get older. If a child initially named Connor insists on wearing dresses and going by Sarah, we should react accordingly but in a way that allows for desistance and doesn't have long-term impacts on health before the child reaches early adolescence.

Why though

Why should that still be carried on? Why should cis be the norm? In most cases, the parents of this hypothetical Sarah often have pushed certain roles and socialized norms on her, depending on when she transitioned. Did she start as a kid, pubescent, pre or post? As an adult? Is she like Kim Petras or Caitlyn Jenner, though those are relatively extreme examples.

From what I see, there really isn't much to gain from keeping the sex-gender system with assignment, unless you could keep assigned sex, but it make it easier to change (ie don't require surgeries to alter a birth certificate or don't demonize gender non-conformity), but even so, by keeping gender variance in mind, it really seems odd to just think my yet to be born child is going to be either a girl or a boy based on how their body appears at birth.

[Fahran]

So where does your source talk about the physical effects?

My source mostly discussed the occurrence of desistance, but I can share a few sources on bone mineralization and infertility as well. I probably ought to have shared it initially. Halting puberty can definitely have an impact on fertility and bone growth, though, in early adolescence, it has been documented to have positive impacts on mental health that outweigh these risks for trans patients. Like I said, it's something I'd recommend for particular individuals once they reach fourteen, provided they're not subtreshhold according to specialists.

Source.

[Fahran]

It doesn't say anything about the effects of blockers, and with those effects, the costs and benefits would lead me to the conclusion that prescribing puberty blockers for children with a gender dysphoria diagnosis who exhibit consistent traits of gender dysphoria and are in an early stage of puberty is still preferable to not doing so.

I shared another source that elaborates on the health benefits and health risks. Puberty blockers aren't without risks, and, to some extent, we're still in the process of observing precisely what positive and negative impacts they have on the health of patients.

[Fahran]

And for the record, the closest statistic I can find for "desistance" is maybe more like 45%.

Steensma, T D, Biemond, R, de Boer, F and Cohen-Kettenis P T (2011) Desisting and persisting gender dysphoria after childhood: A qualitative follow-up study in Clinical Child Psychology and Psychiatry Vol 16(4) pp. 499-516

The source I shared actually analyzed that study in placing the rate at 54%, I believe. In any case, we can't really dismiss either trans identity in children or the occurrence of desistance altogether. We ought to consider both in making these decisions.

[Vassenor]

So where does your source talk about the physical effects?

My source mostly discussed the occurrence of desistance, but I can share a few sources on bone mineralization and infertility as well. I probably ought to have shared it initially. Halting puberty can definitely have an impact on fertility and bone growth, though, in early adolescence, it has been documented to have positive impacts on mental health that outweigh these risks for trans patients. Like I said, it's something I'd recommend for particular individuals once they reach fourteen, provided they're not subtreshhold according to specialists.

Source.

Well this site totally isn't pushing a narrative at all.

[Ifreann]

Puberty blockers are a good compromise for children since the effects aren't permanent.

Giving puberty blockers to children can have quite a few deleterious effects, including bone mineralization and infertility. Really, I would steer clear of describing any child under the age of fourteen as trans in absolute terms given the high frequency of desistance.

Why? I don't understand how these things are related at all. What does it matter if you call someone trans for a few years and then it turns out they're not?

---

Tbh, the best solution with the whole thing on "transing kids" is to just simply stop assigning gender at birth. Is it a boy or a girl? Who cares? It's your child, love and support them no matter what body or identity they have.

This is a utopian pipe dream, but can't a tran dream? Especially when this would solve more problems than it would create?

This'll be much easier when we have sci-fi magical technology and people can physically transition by concentrating in a certain way to access their internal control panel and instruct their body to produce different amounts of hormones and otherwise rekajigger itself.

[Fahran]

Why though

Why should that still be carried on? Why should cis be the norm?

Because only 0.6% of the American population is trans. We do need to allow space for people, including children, who identify as trans but we do not need to dismantle conventions that work and benefit everyone who is cis as a result.

In most cases, the parents of this hypothetical Sarah often have pushed certain roles and socialized norms on her, depending on when she transitioned. Did she start as a kid, pubescent, pre or post? As an adult? Is she like Kim Petras or Caitlyn Jenner, though those are relatively extreme examples.

I had envisioned Sarah as somewhere between seven and twelve. That's around the time when I would start seriously contemplating affirming her gender identity in a regular and uniform way and discussing the possibility of putting her on puberty blockers at the beginning of adolescence. I would not, however, employ puberty blockers until she had attained a level of understanding to make that decision, together with her parents and medical professionals, for herself.

From what I see, there really isn't much to gain from keeping the sex-gender system with assignment, unless you could keep assigned sex, but it make it easier to change (ie don't require surgeries to alter a birth certificate or don't demonize gender non-conformity), but even so, by keeping gender variance in mind, it really seems odd to just think my yet to be born child is going to be either a girl or a boy based on how their body appears at birth.

Again, my reasoning is that the present system works for the vast majority of the population. I do believe we should incorporate brain gender and chromosomes eventually, as we gain a deeper and more insightful understanding of them, but, at the moment, we've got a system that works for most. We just need to make room in it for people who are left out in the cold at the moment. And allowing for a well-informed transition in early adolescence can do that.

[Fahran]

Well this site totally isn't pushing a narrative at all.

Biases notwithstanding, the particular points raised still accurately represent some of the risks and pitfalls of employing puberty blockers in young children. And do not downplay the mental health benefits either.

[Fahran]

Why? I don't understand how these things are related at all. What does it matter if you call someone trans for a few years and then it turns out they're not?

Well, if you give them puberty blockers, they might experience certain negative effects to their health in the event of desistance. I didn't state that you couldn't call them trans or by the gender they identify as. I more so meant that you shouldn't do this definitively or in absolute terms. You should allow for the not insignificant probability that they'll still wind up being cis as adults.