Britain is closing the infamous Tavistock Centre. Finland and Sweden have radically revised their treatment guidelines. But American doctors are advertising surgeries to children on TikTok.
Gender affirming care therapy is a crime? Mutilating bodies of confused young pre-pubescent girls? Telling them there is no other way to come to terms with their bodies during puberty.
For years, I have seen the surge in youth identifying as transgender, and I have understood it as social contagion, much to the woke chagrin of some colleagues. As a child psychiatrist in a cartoon progressive state, I risk being professionally tarred and feathered for voicing support for academics such as Drs. Lisa Littman or Debra Soh. The following anecdote is not hyperbole: I once had an eleven year old patient who was ostracized and bullied for having a Christian worldview (learning from her fundamentalist Christian parents) and not embracing the social engineering curriculum of her public school educators. It is noteworthy that over half of the girls in her middle school home room identified as trans or non-binary. No debate: we should all respect and treat with kindness all human beings and how they would choose to identify themselves, but the other side of the coin is that accepting does not mean embracing or agreeing with anyone’s view on reality, biology, or a natural order. A study was just released:
Has anyone on this thread read this study and have any comments on methodology? The battle for verity of ideas may come down to good study design and math.
Imagine if the medical community applied the same affirmation care to individuals suffering with Anorexia. Do you think that course of treatment would be accepted anywhere near as quick or widely as this?
Has anyone looked at the intelligence levels, educational levels, or other stratifications among people with “gender dysphoria”? I’m not a psychologist, but I wonder if there’s a way to quantify how suggestible someone is. Anyone know the answer to these questions?
Just a gut feel, but it may be mostly white upper middle class female teens who heavily frequent social media. (Ref: Abigail Shriek’s book Irreversible Damage and the stats above)
So, literate, with health care coverage and access to physicians willing to mutilate them to thunderous applause.
I wish I had the link, but look up a horrific story about autism and the refrigerator mom theory titled “I’ve been through this before” to get a glimpse of the future of the trans wave we live with today -- it ends with people denying that they “really” supported it after everyone realizes how insanely wrong it is to cause needless suffering based upon a lie.
The underlying question I was getting at is how suggestible the people are. My basic thought is that the wave of insanity is the result of peer pressure, assuming that the smarter people are, the less suggestible [read: gullible]. There are plenty middle- and upper-class people who have regressed to the mean, so have a paucity if walking around sense.
Among other places, Weimar Germany is a good model for this. People went totally nuts in the 30s. The process is anti-entropic in that, once a movement gets started—no matter how off the wall it is—it attracts followers. It’s a social phenomenon, but it extends into all parts of life. I’ve lived through several examples of it myself. The first was came in the late 60s when I was in college. A Russian chemist/physicist was said to have been in Siberia looking at winter wheat swaying above the frozen tundra and wondered why the water in it didn’t freeze. He postulated that there was another form of water, which got dubbed “polywater,” that was responsible for the effect. Paper after paper appeared in JACS—journal of the American Chemical Society—dealing with polywater. I understood exactly none of them, assuming that my level of understanding simply didn’t reach that necessary to grasp that level of subtlety.
And then, suddenly, people stopped writing about it. The effect simply wasn’t real. It wasn’t so much a hoax as unconscious selection bias regarding data. I don’t recall seeing papers retracted, or even criticized. They were just ignored. Some money wasted, but nobody got hurt.
Around the mid-1980s, digital subtraction angiography, aka DSA, appeared on the scene. A simple IV injection was all that was required to do a neurovascular workup. No one could afford to be left out, so we also bought a unit. In two years I think we got maybe 2-3 readable studies. At our main meeting, a raft of speakers lauded the technique and gave “helpful hints” to overcome limitations. None of them worked for us. The following year’s meeting saw the very same speakers denounce the whole thing as unworkable and useless, which vindicated our experience.
Both of these are examples of people oohing and aahing over the emperor’s clothes. Being a nuts and bolts kinda guy, I always saw a buck naked emperor. Which is exactly how I see people in the trans movement, as well apostles of other social fads. They feel very strongly about….whatever is fashionable to feel very strongly about at the time. And when that fad fades, another will come along. What makes this one different is that actual physical mutilation is involved, so it’s not just protest and picketing.
Malcolm Gladwell’s book Talking to Strangers gets at one reason -- people tend to default to truth, meaning they believe that others are trustworthy.
The cynics are few, and they’re drowned out until everyone else has time to realize that they’re right to ask tough questions and balk at lousy answers.
When I was in college, I got to hear a few lectures by the late, great Philip Morison. He was a physicist, but he and his wife reviewed 5-10 technical books each month in Scientific American. In addition to everything else he did, which was a lot. Very bright guy.
Anyway, he suggested that a good way to look at and react to things was always to stop for a moment and ask yourself if it had “the ring of truth.” That’s served me well for over half a century. Following that suggestion didn’t always make me popular, but it did stop me from doing a few pretty bone-headed things I was tempted to do.
Yes, as an Illinois resident I know that Pritzker is despicable. And he thinks he is a viable candidate for President, seems many in his party agree. Truly unbelievable.
I left the state two years ago but we still have family and friends there, husband still works there, etc. But living in an adjacent state where our gas prices never hit $5, paying 1/2 the sales tax, etc gives me some peace of mind.
I'm blown away that he will get reelected and flabbergasted that he thinks he's a viable POTUS candidate. The guy is the epitome of a hypocrite.
So, every psychiatrist and psychologist did not get the memo on Neo-Marxism and the imperative to destroy identity, so what is going on here? Simple cowardice?
"Gender-affirming care/transgender" is the alchemy of the 21st century. 17th century alchemists were also wrong, but they only experimented on base metals. These evil people experiment on children.
However, in the UK you can get handcuffed and arrested for Gender Critical political cartoons which make a point that hits home regarding LGBTQIA+++WTF (it never includes a D for "Detransitioners") societal bullying:
1) I would imagine that the fracturing consensus on transgenderism is only going to accelerate in the months and years ahead, and moreover that it will broaden drastically to include skepticism about "gender-affirming care" for *adults.* Vulnerable adults are just as easily influenced as children, and I would bet we're going to see more and more medical officials backing off "gender-affirming" procedures no matter the age in all but the most drastically unwell of patients.
2) You really have to ask what we are supposed to make of all this. Countless experts and credentialed medical officials the world over bought into this insanity and pushed it on the most vulnerable members of our population, with the result that there are now countless young men and women across our civilization that have cut off their breasts and genitals, pumped themselves full of synthetic hormones, delayed their body's natural functions, functionally ruined huge parts of their lives, etc. What are we to make of the doctors who enabled this—how can we ever trust people who were hoodwinked by so obvious and so destructive sham? I don't know the answer to that, but I will say I'm a bit nonplussed at their sudden newfound skepticism of it all. This was not hard to foresee, and yet they went ahead with it anyway. I think we'd all be forgiven for never trusting them again.
Sen. Cotton’s bill if passed may eventually will put unscrupulous physicians out of business. But that’s too late.
As a surgeon, I can forcefully state that we only do three things to people: we put stuff in, take stuff out, and/or rearrange ones innards. And once done, it is irreversible. And until this “gender-affirmative” care became faddish it was always at least a serious transgression of any self policing medical oversight board to treat, alter, or remove a normally functioning organ or tissue (with the possible exception of cosmetic plastic surgery).
If one uses the cosmetic surgery analysis and analogy and applies it to gender affirming care, it is instructive. Any plastic surgeon will provide sad examples of dissatisfied people who underwent purely elective cosmetic procedures with expectations beyond cosmetic enhancement.
So called “gender affirming care” is truly experimental especially in minors and must stop before more people are ruined. The data is coming in and as this article summarizes it is bad.
I saw that the main child mutilation center was closing on the BBC, but my fits impression was that they were simply going to start a bunch of regional ones. Was I wrong? Time will tell. It's hard to believe they would stop, unless it's just too expensive for them.
Gender affirming care therapy is a crime? Mutilating bodies of confused young pre-pubescent girls? Telling them there is no other way to come to terms with their bodies during puberty.
The TikTok gender doctor deserves the Bin Laden treatment. Just erase her from existence.
For years, I have seen the surge in youth identifying as transgender, and I have understood it as social contagion, much to the woke chagrin of some colleagues. As a child psychiatrist in a cartoon progressive state, I risk being professionally tarred and feathered for voicing support for academics such as Drs. Lisa Littman or Debra Soh. The following anecdote is not hyperbole: I once had an eleven year old patient who was ostracized and bullied for having a Christian worldview (learning from her fundamentalist Christian parents) and not embracing the social engineering curriculum of her public school educators. It is noteworthy that over half of the girls in her middle school home room identified as trans or non-binary. No debate: we should all respect and treat with kindness all human beings and how they would choose to identify themselves, but the other side of the coin is that accepting does not mean embracing or agreeing with anyone’s view on reality, biology, or a natural order. A study was just released:
https://publications.aap.org/pediatrics/article/doi/10.1542/peds.2022-056567/188709/Sex-Assigned-at-Birth-Ratio-Among-Transgender-and
Has anyone on this thread read this study and have any comments on methodology? The battle for verity of ideas may come down to good study design and math.
> But American doctors are advertising surgeries to children on TikTok.
Wanna know why? It's because they are going to make a bundle off of this horrible monstrous surgical act. Shame on them.
This is going down in history next to the lobotomy.
yup
Terrific satire piece on PITT today, "From the Royal Formerly Known as Mom"
The author basically just took documents from "trans" SJWs like "Chase" Strangio and swapped words like prince and princess for boy and girl.
https://pitt.substack.com/p/from-the-royal-formerly-known-as
This one should make it around the net.
Imagine if the medical community applied the same affirmation care to individuals suffering with Anorexia. Do you think that course of treatment would be accepted anywhere near as quick or widely as this?
Has anyone looked at the intelligence levels, educational levels, or other stratifications among people with “gender dysphoria”? I’m not a psychologist, but I wonder if there’s a way to quantify how suggestible someone is. Anyone know the answer to these questions?
Just a gut feel, but it may be mostly white upper middle class female teens who heavily frequent social media. (Ref: Abigail Shriek’s book Irreversible Damage and the stats above)
So, literate, with health care coverage and access to physicians willing to mutilate them to thunderous applause.
I wish I had the link, but look up a horrific story about autism and the refrigerator mom theory titled “I’ve been through this before” to get a glimpse of the future of the trans wave we live with today -- it ends with people denying that they “really” supported it after everyone realizes how insanely wrong it is to cause needless suffering based upon a lie.
The underlying question I was getting at is how suggestible the people are. My basic thought is that the wave of insanity is the result of peer pressure, assuming that the smarter people are, the less suggestible [read: gullible]. There are plenty middle- and upper-class people who have regressed to the mean, so have a paucity if walking around sense.
Among other places, Weimar Germany is a good model for this. People went totally nuts in the 30s. The process is anti-entropic in that, once a movement gets started—no matter how off the wall it is—it attracts followers. It’s a social phenomenon, but it extends into all parts of life. I’ve lived through several examples of it myself. The first was came in the late 60s when I was in college. A Russian chemist/physicist was said to have been in Siberia looking at winter wheat swaying above the frozen tundra and wondered why the water in it didn’t freeze. He postulated that there was another form of water, which got dubbed “polywater,” that was responsible for the effect. Paper after paper appeared in JACS—journal of the American Chemical Society—dealing with polywater. I understood exactly none of them, assuming that my level of understanding simply didn’t reach that necessary to grasp that level of subtlety.
And then, suddenly, people stopped writing about it. The effect simply wasn’t real. It wasn’t so much a hoax as unconscious selection bias regarding data. I don’t recall seeing papers retracted, or even criticized. They were just ignored. Some money wasted, but nobody got hurt.
Around the mid-1980s, digital subtraction angiography, aka DSA, appeared on the scene. A simple IV injection was all that was required to do a neurovascular workup. No one could afford to be left out, so we also bought a unit. In two years I think we got maybe 2-3 readable studies. At our main meeting, a raft of speakers lauded the technique and gave “helpful hints” to overcome limitations. None of them worked for us. The following year’s meeting saw the very same speakers denounce the whole thing as unworkable and useless, which vindicated our experience.
Both of these are examples of people oohing and aahing over the emperor’s clothes. Being a nuts and bolts kinda guy, I always saw a buck naked emperor. Which is exactly how I see people in the trans movement, as well apostles of other social fads. They feel very strongly about….whatever is fashionable to feel very strongly about at the time. And when that fad fades, another will come along. What makes this one different is that actual physical mutilation is involved, so it’s not just protest and picketing.
Question remains how suggestible the people are.
Malcolm Gladwell’s book Talking to Strangers gets at one reason -- people tend to default to truth, meaning they believe that others are trustworthy.
The cynics are few, and they’re drowned out until everyone else has time to realize that they’re right to ask tough questions and balk at lousy answers.
When I was in college, I got to hear a few lectures by the late, great Philip Morison. He was a physicist, but he and his wife reviewed 5-10 technical books each month in Scientific American. In addition to everything else he did, which was a lot. Very bright guy.
Anyway, he suggested that a good way to look at and react to things was always to stop for a moment and ask yourself if it had “the ring of truth.” That’s served me well for over half a century. Following that suggestion didn’t always make me popular, but it did stop me from doing a few pretty bone-headed things I was tempted to do.
I’ll check out the Gladwell. Tx for the tip.
Really interesting discussion: "Predators Are Targeting Our Schools"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3Pwa2rkL6Qw
Here's a must read too....those pushing it in the US! A sitting governor and family! Despicable! https://www.tabletmag.com/sections/news/articles/billionaire-family-pushing-synthetic-sex-identities-ssi-pritzkers
Yes, as an Illinois resident I know that Pritzker is despicable. And he thinks he is a viable candidate for President, seems many in his party agree. Truly unbelievable.
I left the state two years ago but we still have family and friends there, husband still works there, etc. But living in an adjacent state where our gas prices never hit $5, paying 1/2 the sales tax, etc gives me some peace of mind.
I'm blown away that he will get reelected and flabbergasted that he thinks he's a viable POTUS candidate. The guy is the epitome of a hypocrite.
So, every psychiatrist and psychologist did not get the memo on Neo-Marxism and the imperative to destroy identity, so what is going on here? Simple cowardice?
"Gender-affirming care/transgender" is the alchemy of the 21st century. 17th century alchemists were also wrong, but they only experimented on base metals. These evil people experiment on children.
However, in the UK you can get handcuffed and arrested for Gender Critical political cartoons which make a point that hits home regarding LGBTQIA+++WTF (it never includes a D for "Detransitioners") societal bullying:
https://notthebee.com/article/watch-british-veteran-arrested-by-5-cops-because-someone-has-been-caused-anxiety-based-on-his-social-media-post
This has nothing at all to do with acceptance of homosexuality or being kind.
Two things seem evident to me at this point:
1) I would imagine that the fracturing consensus on transgenderism is only going to accelerate in the months and years ahead, and moreover that it will broaden drastically to include skepticism about "gender-affirming care" for *adults.* Vulnerable adults are just as easily influenced as children, and I would bet we're going to see more and more medical officials backing off "gender-affirming" procedures no matter the age in all but the most drastically unwell of patients.
2) You really have to ask what we are supposed to make of all this. Countless experts and credentialed medical officials the world over bought into this insanity and pushed it on the most vulnerable members of our population, with the result that there are now countless young men and women across our civilization that have cut off their breasts and genitals, pumped themselves full of synthetic hormones, delayed their body's natural functions, functionally ruined huge parts of their lives, etc. What are we to make of the doctors who enabled this—how can we ever trust people who were hoodwinked by so obvious and so destructive sham? I don't know the answer to that, but I will say I'm a bit nonplussed at their sudden newfound skepticism of it all. This was not hard to foresee, and yet they went ahead with it anyway. I think we'd all be forgiven for never trusting them again.
Yes, please see my Nuremberg trial of doctors comment below.
Sen. Cotton’s bill if passed may eventually will put unscrupulous physicians out of business. But that’s too late.
As a surgeon, I can forcefully state that we only do three things to people: we put stuff in, take stuff out, and/or rearrange ones innards. And once done, it is irreversible. And until this “gender-affirmative” care became faddish it was always at least a serious transgression of any self policing medical oversight board to treat, alter, or remove a normally functioning organ or tissue (with the possible exception of cosmetic plastic surgery).
If one uses the cosmetic surgery analysis and analogy and applies it to gender affirming care, it is instructive. Any plastic surgeon will provide sad examples of dissatisfied people who underwent purely elective cosmetic procedures with expectations beyond cosmetic enhancement.
So called “gender affirming care” is truly experimental especially in minors and must stop before more people are ruined. The data is coming in and as this article summarizes it is bad.
Thank you, please see my Nuremberg trial of doctors comment below.
I saw that the main child mutilation center was closing on the BBC, but my fits impression was that they were simply going to start a bunch of regional ones. Was I wrong? Time will tell. It's hard to believe they would stop, unless it's just too expensive for them.