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

[Vassenor]

teens should be allowed to take puberty blockers if they want to, and shouldn't have to decide about srs at the same time.

Hotter take put everyone on puberty blockers unless they can confirm that they are genuinely cisgender.

This but unironically.

[An-Tanwir]

teens should be allowed to take puberty blockers if they want to, and shouldn't have to decide about srs at the same time.

You do not just give minors drugs. That's tantamount to medical malpractice if you're not treating a medical condition or they cannot give informed consent for an elective procedure.

I would agree except in cases where the parents show a clear anti-transgender bias, a medical professional has signed off that puberty blockers would be psychologically beneficial, and the minor in question consents.

[Wink Wonk We Like Stonks]

You do not just give minors drugs. That's tantamount to medical malpractice if you're not treating a medical condition or they cannot give informed consent for an elective procedure.

I would agree except in cases where the parents show a clear anti-transgender bias, a medical professional has signed off that puberty blockers would be psychologically beneficial, and the minor in question consents.

what's your reasoning?

[Wink Wonk We Like Stonks]

Hotter take put everyone on puberty blockers unless they can confirm that they are genuinely cisgender.

This but unironically.

seems like a waste of time and medication. most people wouldn't need or want them, and there would probably be negative side effects.
kinda based of you tho.

[Nanatsu no Tsuki]

teens should be allowed to take puberty blockers if they want to, and shouldn't have to decide about srs at the same time.

You do not just give minors drugs. That's tantamount to medical malpractice if you're not treating a medical condition or they cannot give informed consent for an elective procedure.

If there’s no medical condition, sure. But when it comes to the diagnosis of gender non-conformity in minors, more often than not, doctors tend to prescribe blockers because they deem the psychological treatment to be more beneficial than the possible side effects or no treatment at all.

[Fahran]

I would agree except in cases where the parents show a clear anti-transgender bias, a medical professional has signed off that puberty blockers would be psychologically beneficial, and the minor in question consents.

Yeah, I'm about in the same place on that one. I do think the minor in question should be beyond a certain threshhold though to address the problem of desistance. That might harm some patients who were below the threshhold but remained committed to transitioning into adulthood, but it will help the largest number of patients by preventing those who would not have remained committing from potentially making irreversible medical decisions with long-term repurcussions. In general, I tend to favor HRT coming into the picture around the age of sixteen so that's part of it. It minimizes the risks associated with puberty blockers and allows for a more immediate transition for patients who would benefit from it.

[Fahran]

If there’s no medical condition, sure. But when it comes to the diagnosis of gender non-conformity in minors, more often than not, doctors tend to prescribe blockers because they deem the psychological treatment to be more beneficial than the possible side effects or no treatment at all.

That's true. I was more jumping on the "if they want to" because I felt that was a very irresponsible way to frame the issue. If a medical professional believes that blockers are a sound medical/psychological treatment, that's a different matter altogether.

[Auzkhia]

I would agree except in cases where the parents show a clear anti-transgender bias, a medical professional has signed off that puberty blockers would be psychologically beneficial, and the minor in question consents.

Yeah, I'm about in the same place on that one. I do think the minor in question should be beyond a certain threshhold though to address the problem of desistance. That might harm some patients who were below the threshhold but remained committed to transitioning into adulthood, but it will help the largest number of patients by preventing those who would not have remained committing from potentially making irreversible medical decisions with long-term repurcussions.

Natal puberty resulted in some irreversible medical changes.

Like, what to do with a girl with a deep voice and a five o'clock shadow?

[Fahran]

minors get (medical) drugs all the time? it's not medical malpractice to prescribe blockers to a teen with dysphoria.

Having a prescription isn't the same as them simply "wanting" to take the drugs. It's a medically necessary treatment at that point or involves guardian consent for what amounts to an elective procedure - which is about where I want the law to be on the issue.

[Nanatsu no Tsuki]

If there’s no medical condition, sure. But when it comes to the diagnosis of gender non-conformity in minors, more often than not, doctors tend to prescribe blockers because they deem the psychological treatment to be more beneficial than the possible side effects or no treatment at all.

That's true. I was more jumping on the "if they want to" because I felt that was a very irresponsible way to frame the issue. If a medical professional believes that blockers are a sound medical/psychological treatment, that's a different matter altogether.

Well, in fairness, and because this happened to me as a minor too (a bad bout of bronchitis), doctors tend to talk to both the parents and the minor frankly and input from the minors themselves is not uncommonly asked, particularly if the patient is a bit older.

For the truly young, treatment is often left to the parents/guardians. Unless a doctor thinks the child is endangered by parental refusal. In which case, treatment may be court mandated.

[Fahran]

Well, in fairness, and because this happened to me as a minor too (a bad bout of bronchitis), doctors tend to talk to both the parents and the minor frankly and input from the minors themselves is not uncommonly asked, particularly if the patient is a bit older.

For the truly young, treatment is often left to the parents/guardians. Unless a doctor thinks the child is endangered by parental refusal. In which case, treatment may be court mandated.

Well, yes. My main gripe is that I would like to see puberty blockers, HRT, and SRS regarded in much the same way as we regard other forms of medical and psychological treatment. Of course, a physician or psychologist should talk to the patient to determine their treatment needs, but I'm quite insistent that a medical need is distinct from a want. With regard to the ruling, it doesn't really contradict this standard. The problem that arises is that transgender and gender-nonconforming youth may be denied necessary care as the result of parental disapproval, likely because they'll never even get to the stage where they're dealing with medical professionals who could frame the issue in medical terms.

[Fahran]

Natal puberty resulted in some irreversible medical changes.

Yes, it does.

Like, what to do with a girl with a deep voice and a five o'clock shadow?

Provide her with the best available treatment options in light of the circumstances.

[The New California Republic]

You do not just give minors drugs. That's tantamount to medical malpractice if you're not treating a medical condition or they cannot give informed consent for an elective procedure.

If there’s no medical condition, sure. But when it comes to the diagnosis of gender non-conformity in minors, more often than not, doctors tend to prescribe blockers because they deem the psychological treatment to be more beneficial than the possible side effects or no treatment at all.

Yes. It's a very common thing that trans people mention: that the most psychologically damaging aspect of the process is the significant delay between wanting to begin the process and actually being able to, the delay either caused by a lack of provision for trans-related needs in the local healthcare provider, or regulations that push the date back so far that the person has more or less completed puberty by the time the process begins, which then can entail physically traumatic surgery that the puberty blockers would have partially or near completely eliminated the need for. The ruling says that it's to protect children, but all that it is going to do is put them at more risk of psychological damage.

[Nanatsu no Tsuki]

Well, in fairness, and because this happened to me as a minor too (a bad bout of bronchitis), doctors tend to talk to both the parents and the minor frankly and input from the minors themselves is not uncommonly asked, particularly if the patient is a bit older.

For the truly young, treatment is often left to the parents/guardians. Unless a doctor thinks the child is endangered by parental refusal. In which case, treatment may be court mandated.

Well, yes. My main gripe is that I would like to see puberty blockers, HRT, and SRS regarded in much the same way as we regard other forms of medical and psychological treatment. Of course, a physician or psychologist should talk to the patient to determine their treatment needs, but I'm quite insistent that a medical need is distinct from a want. With regard to the ruling, it doesn't really contradict this standard. The problem that arises is that transgender and gender-nonconforming youth may be denied necessary care as the result of parental disapproval, likely because they'll never even get to the stage where they're dealing with medical professionals who could frame the issue in medical terms.

Framing. The want is weighed in against the medical need. And I’m almost sure doctors don’t just give blockers immediately unless their assessment calls for them. This often involves a number of evaluations, both physically and psychologically, of the minor in question.

[Fahran]

Framing. The want is weighed in against the medical need. And I’m almost sure doctors don’t just give blockers immediately unless their assessment calls for them. This often involves a number of evaluations, both physically and psychologically, of the minor in question.

I don't really disagree with any of that at all.

[Auzkhia]

Natal puberty resulted in some irreversible medical changes.

Yes, it does.

Yes, and we shouldn't force trans youths to undergo it.

Like, what to do with a girl with a deep voice and a five o'clock shadow?

Provide her with the best available treatment options in light of the circumstances.

Puberty blockers would have solved that issue from jump, but if that were not available or possible, voice training and laser hair removal or electrolysis. Which should be free, or covered by insurance, or much more accessible.

[Nanatsu no Tsuki]

If there’s no medical condition, sure. But when it comes to the diagnosis of gender non-conformity in minors, more often than not, doctors tend to prescribe blockers because they deem the psychological treatment to be more beneficial than the possible side effects or no treatment at all.

Yes. It's a very common thing that trans people mention: that the most psychologically damaging aspect of the process is the significant delay between wanting to begin the process and actually being able to, the delay either caused by a lack of provision for trans-related needs in the local healthcare provider, or regulations that push the date back so far that the person has more or less completed puberty by the time the process begins, which then can entail physically traumatic surgery that the puberty blockers would have partially or near completely eliminated the need for. The ruling says that it's to protect children, but all that it is going to do is put them at more risk of psychological damage.

The way I view that is as gatekeeping going into overdrive. Excessive gatekeeping is quite harmful too, and more often than not, not needed. But where minors are concerned, healthcare is trickier. Parents are seen as arbiters of treatment and, unless a doctor sees the parents’ refusal of treatment as counter to the minor’s well-being and expressly going against the kid’s input too (which should be heard and considered), the decision is left to the parents.

[Vassenor]

So got my deed poll all filled out and just need to get it signed and witnessed whenever I start full timing it.

[Nea Chora]

So got my deed poll all filled out and just need to get it signed and witnessed whenever I start full timing it.

deed poll? like landlord things?

[Vassenor]

So got my deed poll all filled out and just need to get it signed and witnessed whenever I start full timing it.

deed poll? like landlord things?

More the bit of paper that formally changes my legal name.

[Nea Chora]

deed poll? like landlord things?

More the bit of paper that formally changes my legal name.

oh, that makes more sense. congrats!

[Arcturus Novus]

Like, what to do with a girl with a deep voice and a five o'clock shadow?

Well, as a girl with a deep voice and stubble, we like dark chocolate and going to art museums.

[Auzkhia]

Like, what to do with a girl with a deep voice and a five o'clock shadow?

Well, as a girl with a deep voice and stubble, we like dark chocolate and going to art museums.

I mean same. I've had my first date with my fiancée there, who is also trans, and we both work on voice training together.

So got my deed poll all filled out and just need to get it signed and witnessed whenever I start full timing it.

Congrats! Hopefully you will have your real name formalized soon.

[Grenartia]

You miss the point so frequently, its impossible to believe you're doing anything other than purposely engaging in bad faith.

On the off chance you are genuine, no, being trans is not the same as having a religion, but they are both intensely personal phenomena that cannot be objectively proven or disproven.

The point is you say absurd things

Such as...?

and don't consider their implications.

I consider the implications of everything I say, before I say them. Even the things I say in jest. I never say anything I would regret.

Religion as a concept exists, it's just that they are all to the best of my knowledge wrong and the evidence supports that pretty well. At a conceptual level nonbinary people, psychics, and faith healers exist it's just that all evidence suggests that they're all wrong or lying.

What actual evidence, instead of an ideological bias, exists that suggests NB people are "wrong or lying"?

What if I'm a plural system and one of my personas is the female diclonious Lucy from the anime Elfin Lied.

Ok. What if? What if elephants pooped popcorn?

Why am I speaking in hypotheticals, you view rational skepticism as bigotry,

I don't, but keep going off.

I am totally that insane thing I just said. I expect you to refer to me by my preferred pronouns, they change them every nine minutes as I cycle through my personas. You're cool with that right?

There's a difference between good faith and bad faith, and you clearly do nothing but engage in bad faith.

Unless it inherently causes a negative effect on their life, why should it matter?

Should we consider religious belief "not of sound mind"? After all, there's no objective proof for the veracity of any given religious person's theological beliefs.

Is schizophrenia on the same level as religion and being trans?

No, but schizophrenia objectively inherently causes a negative effect on the life of the person in question, so the comparison is utterly moot.

Slurs for trans people who don't agree with you should be avoided. Whether the trans person agrees or disagrees, slurs against them are necessarily transphobic.

Truscum isn't really a slur, it's pejorative but not a slur. It attacks the ideology, not the person. Though hardly anyone uses outside of tumblr, I guess now Twitter, since twitter is the new tumblr.

Essentially this.

You're making it out as if being non-binary and wanting to be referred to as "they/them" where applicable, is a kin to being a hyper otherkin headmatee or something.

Are they not the same? Because someone just signed off on them, you're beyond the Poe barrier. Nothing is so stupid it won't see at least some approval in trans circles.

You have no right to doubt otherkin or plurals, they are substantiated by the exact same amount of evidence as nonbinary people.

I actually respect plural people, and think they get a lot more shit than they deserve.

Skepticism is like mayonnaise, it goes well with many things, but you wouldn't want to just eat it alone.

There is, in fact, such a thing as too much skepticism. Anyone who disagrees is free to test my hypothesis by doing one of the following:
-stop breathing
-stop drinking water
-stop eating

Surely, if there's no such thing as too much skepticism, then it is entirely rational to be skeptical of the need to do those things.

mantis shrimp would like to know your location

Yes, now how do we know about the internal experience of the mantis shrimp?

How do we know you're not just a very clever mantis shrimp?

If it were just a social construct, there wouldn't be the number of dissenters there are.

people disagree about and have different opinions on social constructs all the time (ex. money). regardless, i don't think auz means to say that it's just a social construct, but that it's a social construct rooted in several different factors (neurology, society, and on and on)

That's honestly the most rational take to have.

It reminds me a lot of the nature v nurture debate, and science has answered that to differing degrees in different circumstances, its more or less both nature and nurture, as opposed to solely one or the other. There is no reason to think this isn't similar.

unless you have a really good architect at some point brutalism gets boring

eco-brutalism on the other hand....

Simping for terrible architecture isn't the purpose for this thread.

The high court has ruled that children in England under 16 cannot give informed consent on the use of puberty blockers.
The ruling is complete legal codswallop which hinges upon the insane argument that it is somehow necessary for the patient to know whether or not they want HRT and SRS at the time they begin to take the blockers.

TERF Island at it again.

Canadian Actor and Producer Elliot Page comes out as trans on his twitter and instagram, he uses he/him or they/them.

Which gives me a good idea for the new thread title, which is desperately needed.

teens should be allowed to take puberty blockers if they want to, and shouldn't have to decide about srs at the same time.

You do not just give minors drugs. That's tantamount to medical malpractice if you're not treating a medical condition or they cannot give informed consent for an elective procedure.

That's a bad faith interpretation of Wink's post. Puberty blockers (and even hormones) should be treated like anti-depressants. Fundamentally necessary for some people to live their lives without constantly considering and/or attempting suicide.

This but unironically.

seems like a waste of time and medication. most people wouldn't need or want them, and there would probably be negative side effects.
kinda based of you tho.

Indeed.

I would agree except in cases where the parents show a clear anti-transgender bias, a medical professional has signed off that puberty blockers would be psychologically beneficial, and the minor in question consents.

Yeah, I'm about in the same place on that one. I do think the minor in question should be beyond a certain threshhold though to address the problem of desistance.

I have Thoughts^TM about desistance. To my knowledge, no hard numbers exist on the phenomenon that adequately address the social factors that would cause it. I.E., trans kids who are being pressured by parents/other family, friends/classmates, and society at large, into lying and saying "I'm not really trans, it was just a phase". It is well known that psychological manipulation, torment, and even torture, will cause people to say anything, even things that aren't true, in order to get it to stop.

This isn't to say that no kid ever truly is a desister, but rather that given society's transphobia, even in the present day in ""tolerant"" or "accepting" nations, lying about desistance to make their life easier is extremely hard to rule out, and its entirely reasonable on that basis to think that the desistance figures are overinflated because of it.

That might harm some patients who were below the threshhold but remained committed to transitioning into adulthood, but it will help the largest number of patients by preventing those who would not have remained committing from potentially making irreversible medical decisions with long-term repurcussions.

The real question is, how many of those below-threshhold patients will experience irreversible harm because of lack of treatment?0

In general, I tend to favor HRT coming into the picture around the age of sixteen so that's part of it. It minimizes the risks associated with puberty blockers and allows for a more immediate transition for patients who would benefit from it.

I actually agree.

Like, what to do with a girl with a deep voice

Personally, I've taken the black pill on my deep voice. Voice training requires arcane knowledge I cannot comprehend, and so my voice will remain this way for the foreseeable future. We should normalize girls with deep voices.

Like, what to do with a girl with a deep voice and a five o'clock shadow?

Well, as a girl with a deep voice and stubble, we like dark chocolate and going to art museums.

NGL, that does sound like a good time. Gonna need to do that whenever I can finally visit my girlfriend (damn COVID).

So got my deed poll all filled out and just need to get it signed and witnessed whenever I start full timing it.

Hope it goes well!

[Grenartia]

Title has been updated. Unsure what to put as the next poll, so I'm leaving it blank until I get an idea or someone suggests a good one. A plurality of people seem to think I should do the next thread, so I will, but if a thread regular wants to throw their hat in the ring, I'll make that the poll.