Interesting post - thank you. One point: if detransition is impossible to predict but we know that some people (and the numbers are growing) will be harmed by these treatments, isn’t that an argument FOR banning pediatric ‘gender affirming’ medical interventions? Seems to me that the burden of proof lies with those who advocate for these treatments, not the other way around. And that proof of benefit simply doesn’t exist in the scientific literature (see Cass Review). Kids cannot provide informed consent to experimental treatments.
Perhaps the question is, can clinicians guarantee a durable trans ID, and if not, is it ethical to medicalize some adolescents who will eventually detransition so that adolescents who will not detransition are not discriminated against? These clinicians and surgeons need to work this out in public.
Well constructed but the premise is flawed, reiterated several ways.
Nobody is assigned female at birth. They are female or male, there are two sexes, 99% of which are known immediately post-partum. Scientistms in writing attempting to provide illusory credence to the ideas use the language and structure (acronyms) of real science - “Assigned Female at Birth (AFAB)” - to create the aura of seriousness - you could call it “impersonating science” as trans individuals “impersonate sex”.
Likewise, nobody detransitions because they cannot transition to a different sex in the first place. The use of the term (in the circles which engineered the pseudo-science around trans) performs “reification”, (normally called repetition), making something seem (truly) real by way of using terminology repetitively. People with a sex delusion can cease impersonation, or become “disillusioned”, but they cannot “detransition”.
The fact that women have adopted wholesale delusions leading to extreme body chemical and surgical mutilation is not really new, now is it. The largest consumers of plastic surgery (except I suppose “Hair Club for Men” and tattooing) have been women. It’s just that the justification has shifted. Once they were not female enough, now it seems they are all too female.
One day people female at conception will hopefully find life and meaning being the women that they are rather than constructions that they aren’t.
Perhaps that’s a more meaningful conversation. Less scientism and more thoughtful.
Interesting post - thank you. One point: if detransition is impossible to predict but we know that some people (and the numbers are growing) will be harmed by these treatments, isn’t that an argument FOR banning pediatric ‘gender affirming’ medical interventions? Seems to me that the burden of proof lies with those who advocate for these treatments, not the other way around. And that proof of benefit simply doesn’t exist in the scientific literature (see Cass Review). Kids cannot provide informed consent to experimental treatments.
Perhaps the question is, can clinicians guarantee a durable trans ID, and if not, is it ethical to medicalize some adolescents who will eventually detransition so that adolescents who will not detransition are not discriminated against? These clinicians and surgeons need to work this out in public.
Well constructed but the premise is flawed, reiterated several ways.
Nobody is assigned female at birth. They are female or male, there are two sexes, 99% of which are known immediately post-partum. Scientistms in writing attempting to provide illusory credence to the ideas use the language and structure (acronyms) of real science - “Assigned Female at Birth (AFAB)” - to create the aura of seriousness - you could call it “impersonating science” as trans individuals “impersonate sex”.
Likewise, nobody detransitions because they cannot transition to a different sex in the first place. The use of the term (in the circles which engineered the pseudo-science around trans) performs “reification”, (normally called repetition), making something seem (truly) real by way of using terminology repetitively. People with a sex delusion can cease impersonation, or become “disillusioned”, but they cannot “detransition”.
Cheryl Lynn has a nice tune about it.
https://youtu.be/fI569nw0YUQ?si=YUGmlLx27gWhB3aK
The fact that women have adopted wholesale delusions leading to extreme body chemical and surgical mutilation is not really new, now is it. The largest consumers of plastic surgery (except I suppose “Hair Club for Men” and tattooing) have been women. It’s just that the justification has shifted. Once they were not female enough, now it seems they are all too female.
One day people female at conception will hopefully find life and meaning being the women that they are rather than constructions that they aren’t.
Perhaps that’s a more meaningful conversation. Less scientism and more thoughtful.