by SunMum
The author is a UK academic and mother of a son who experienced sudden onset gender dysphoria. She has attended the Gendered Intelligence parents support group, and her son consulted Stuart Lorimer at GenderCare. She can be found on Twitter as SunMum@Mum3Sun
The business model of a private gender clinic in the UK looks a dead cert. To start with, you need demand, and the rising demand for gender reassignment services offers that in abundance. The NHS offers a gender reassignment pathway, but demand in recent years has outstripped the resources of a publicly funded health service. Waiting lists at the main adult provider, the Charing Cross Gender Identity Clinic, the UK’s ‘oldest and largest adult clinic’ founded in 1966, are currently about 12 months from the first referral. Referrals have ‘almost quadrupled in 10 years, from 498 in 2006-07 to 1,892 in 2015-16’ according to the Guardian in July 2016.
At the Tavistock and Portman, the only NHS service for children and adolescents with gender dysphoria, referrals have increased ‘about 50% a year since 2010-11.’ In the year leading up to this Guardian report, the rate of change in child referrals showed ‘an unexpected and unprecedented increase of 100%, up from 697 to 1,398 referrals’.
In the same 2016 Guardian article, Charing Cross GIC lead clinician James Barrett comments jocularly on this sudden increase in demand:
‘It obviously can’t continue like that forever because we’d be treating everyone in the country, but there isn’t any sign of that levelling off.’
Now this is a rather strange comment, given that only five years before, in 2011, Barrett stated that rates of gender dysphoria were stable and unchanging. Citing a 1996 study, he presented the condition as vanishingly rare: ‘It seems that the incidence of transsexualism is very roughly 1 in 60000 males and 1 in 100000 females, and it seems to have remained constant’. Given that ‘treatment is drastic and irreversible’, Barrett insisted that diagnosis must be entrusted to the experts of the gender identity clinic:
The least certain diagnosis is that made by the patient, made as it is without any training or objectivity. This uncertainty is not lessened by the patient’s frequently high degree of conviction. Neither does the support of others with gender dysphoria help, since conviction leads people to associate with the likeminded and to discount or fail to seek out disharmonious views. [ James Barrett, Advances in psychiatric treatment (2011), vol. 17, 381–388 doi: 10.1192/apt.bp.109.007484)
Pitching the service: Respect and Authority
GenderCare, headed by Stuart Lorimer, is a private London gender clinic mostly staffed by clinicians employed at Charing Cross GIC: endocrinologist Leighton Seal, psychologist Christina Richards and speech therapist Christella Antoni. These are professionals who have reputations at stake.
And while GenderCare does offer some Skype and email consultations, prospective patients or parents of gender confused young adults can be reassured that this is not an online clinic like that run by Helen Webberley, a Welsh GP whose Online Transgender Medical Clinic displays no more relevant qualifications than a one hour e-course in ‘Gender Variance’ designed by a transactivist organisation for GPs.
Twitter contains some negative reports of Webberley’s outfit: ‘A guy I know was rushed into hospital with liver failure because of Dr W’s incompetence, not having his bloods reviewed meant he was on too high a dosage of testosterone & literally nearly died.’ According to one young person, Webberley ‘has this weird online ‘grooming’ thing going on, contacting young people via social media’. Of course, Twitter testimonials do not constitute actual evidence and should be viewed with caution. Yet it’s clear to anyone who spends time investigating that young people are discerning as they sift through their choices and look for medical help they trust.
The GenderCare website by contrast is reassuringly respectable: these are ‘Specialists in Gender Care’, genuinely experts in their field. The site and FAQ frequently remind us that patients will be seen by a team of medical experts The FAQ emphasises hormonal treatment, with assurances that the letter needed for medical transition will be prepared as quickly as possible.
What would be the hurry? It appears that, since 2011 when Lorimer’s Charing Cross colleague James Barrett insisted on the ‘drastic and irreversible’ nature of medical transition and the caution that the ‘least certain diagnosis is that made by the patient’, there has been a sea change in the field. Now Barrett presents gender dysphoria as a condition with no parallel. It simply is what it is, and gender specialists are sui generis: neither psychiatrists, nor endocrinologists, but what it says on the can: ‘gender specialists’. Barrett compares gender dysphoria in a 2016 blog post for the BMJ, to ‘the Australasian Platypus’[full article behind paywall]:
The first specimens were dismissed as a joke of some sort.
But then more came, and alive and kicking at that. There followed a mighty taxonomological struggle. They were reptiles or perhaps some sort of bird, surely, as they were warm blooded, laid eggs and were venomous. On the other hand, the fur argued for mammals, but they didn’t have proper breasts, the defining feature of the mammals, and that business of being venomous is more of a reptile-like thing, is it not? And they do lay eggs…but warm blooded…perhaps a bird of some sort…?
In the end, it was all solved by everyone admitting that the Platypus was real, important, couldn’t be dismissed and didn’t fit any existing category very well. It got its own, special category where it has paddled, very happily, ever since, albeit joined by echidnas and some long-extinct fossilised forebears.
The comparison is witty and memorable, but leaves us no wiser. Lorimer also subscribes to what we might call the Platypus model of gender theory (‘a variety of clinical specialisms might lay reasonable claim to ownership of gender care but, like the platypus, it’s its own creature, distinct and different’. Although trained as a ‘Liaison psych’ he believes that ‘ultimately, it’s about pragmatism – who has the appropriate skill-set to do the work.’
For gender identity, there is no well-founded theoretical model, no objective test: we simply have to believe in the authority of the expert. Believe me because I say so. For the young people who visit GenderCare, diagnosis by a gender specialist offers confirmation and validation of their internal sense of self. YouTube videos about ‘my first visit’ to GenderCare form a genre of their own, revealing the overwhelming power of this validation. One young person reports
‘It were a really positive experience. He were very validating and he shouldn’t have been because I obviously know that someone validating your experience isn’t necessary. But hearing him saying the words saying he’s diagnosed me, he’s signing me off…It’s like all my Christmases come at once.’
There are many transition YouTubes made by young clients of Dr. Lorimer; they are moving videos, in which these young people freely admit they suffer with self harm and sometimes suicidality. A single visit to GenderCare can apparently provide a rapid remedy. The process is quick and simple: when blood tests are in and the letter comes through, a young woman who desires to transition FTM can start testosterone. One has already got ‘syringes through the post’, the ‘sharps bin’ and the needles:
‘I don’t know if you’ll be able to see this. Look at the fucking size of that needle. Look at it compared to the size of my finger. Well clearly I’m not needle-phobic. But fuck, it’s huge. I’d hit myself in the face with a brick if it meant starting on testosterone.’
Pushing at the boundaries
In taking on private work, Lorimer would need to protect his professional reputation and adhere to legal and medical regulations. This may at times present complications. In 2014, according to a post on ‘The Angels’ (a trans support forum), the UK’s Care Quality Commission (CQC) raised questions about the ‘grey area’ of his private practice, prompting Dr Lorimer to temporarily stop seeing clients.
Leaving aside the question of what may or may not have happened in 2014, the key regulatory boundaries with gender reassignment are to do with time (how quickly hormones are dispensed) and age (those under 18 are treated in a different way from adults). For much of 2016, the GenderCare website warned that hormones are not normally prescribed on a first visit. That is certainly not the belief expressed on Twitter today:
The burgeoning youth market
GenderCare’s FAQ tells us they primarily treat over-18s, although some exceptions are made. Lorimer confirms this on Twitter:
Earlier in this post, we saw that some young people on Twitter were freaked out by what one calls ‘this weird online grooming thing going on’ by Helen Webberley’s outfit. The respectable GenderCare would surely do no such thing. But Lorimer too has a social media presence through which he touts for business, a Twitter voice seemingly designed to speak to the young – especially trans men. Here we find him mythologizing the joys of testosterone:
Parents know that when young people want something, they want it Now! And for some young women the thing that is needed, and needed quickly, is testosterone, seen by dysphoric adolescent females as a panacea for all ills.
About ‘two thirds’ of his patients, Lorimer explains are ‘trans men’:
Like the proverbial high court judge, I need to make my way over to the Urban Dictionary . But Lorimer is the doc who talks to young people, who plays knowingly with the idea of ‘A girl’s body and the way she carries it.’ Looking at YouTube or at Twitter, you would think that Stuart Lorimer was an expert on adolescent gender dysphoria. But this apparently is not the case:
Lorimer may have ‘extremely limited experience of children/adolescents’. But it takes a very limited dip into the sea of adolescent angst freely available on Twitter and YouTube to realise that GenderCare clients are in the throes of the kinds of relationship and body issues that many adults remember. These are not strange young people, but people suffering from a horribly familiar set of feelings. Of course, we don’t know the age of all those who tweet of vlog about their GenderCare appointments. They might simply be youthful in spirit, but young they certainly appear to be. These don’t sound like people who are approaching ‘drastic and irreversible’ bodily alterations with maturity, discretion or objectivity:
Perhaps most troubling is that in 2016 Lorimer arrived on Tumblr, overwhelmingly a place for young people (very popular with ages 13-18), with a GenderCare Tumblr site. Lorimer seems anxious. Why? Is it because he knows he’s rather old to be on Tumblr?
Tumblr is full of accolades for GenderCare. And whilst one might think a need for hormones and surgery would be necessary only for those who strongly believe themselves to be the opposite sex, evidently even ‘nonbinaries’ are supported in their quest for medical intervention via GenderCare:
Lest readers think this nonbinary stuff is hyperbole, Dr Lorimer (aka The MXMaster) confirmed the Tumblrite’s observation on Twitter last August.
The market potential for ‘nonbinaries’ must be unlimited. Who amongst us fully conforms to gender stereotypes? And GenderCare isn’t the only UK gender clinic cashing in on the ‘enbie’ market:
Let’s see: Can you spot the difference between ‘non-binary’ and ‘binary’ mastectomy?
But returning to GenderCare, one of the more ironic aspects of all this is that Lorimer himself is certainly old enough and wise enough to see beyond the teenage rush for bodily alteration. A highly flattering image of Lorimer appears on the website of photographer James M. Barrett (not the gender clinician this time but a photographer who specialises in beautiful images of gay men). The photographer’s Facebook page comments sagely on the contemporary rush for bodily alteration:
‘In popular culture, there is an extraordinary urgency to take charge of our bodies and minds, and to “become the person that we were always meant to be”! It is as if we can rewrite our lives and give birth to new selves, simply through the power of positive self-belief, and some bloody good cosmetic work on our physical appearance! It is not just a practical idea that looking more attractive might increase our pulling power or lift our spirits. It is the fantasy that if we could just become achingly beautiful, then we will also be unbearably desirable, and our whole lives will be transformed from ordinary to unique. And of course, digital photography plays right into this fantasy, allowing us to perform virtual nick-and-tuck manipulations, and to airbrush a veneer of youthfulness onto our imagined selves. The images in this portrait series have also been heavily worked in post-production, but the effect is meant to suggest something very different: a harsh beauty that resonates with uncertainty, doubt, restlessness, world-weariness, perhaps mid-life crisis…but which also carries a tender intimacy, resilience, ruggedness, and a new-found robustness that comes from surviving a crisis.’
Wise words. And we know that Lorimer subscribes to this aesthetic. Not only has Barrett photographed him but under another image a ‘Stuart Lorimer’ comments: ‘Fantastic portrait!’. In his own photograph, Lorimer looks great: retouched, digitally improved, there is no necessity for cosmetic surgery, drugs, or scalpels.
For professional purposes, simpler photographic techniques suffice:
Now Lorimer knows, for certain, that Tumblr is for young people:
‘Tumblr, like lycra is probably not for anyone over 30 –yet here I am. Every fibre in my fortysomething being is screaming at me “GO! THIS IS FOR YOUNG PEOPLE!” but I’m resisting that because I think it may be useful for me to tout for lucrative business, as head of GenderCare, to have a presence here.’
Why? Maybe because young people use Tumblr to explore sub cultures of body hatred and body alteration. Lorimer is careful to add a disclaimer that he does not represent his ‘NHS employers or my GenderCare colleagues’.
But there is no escaping the fact that this is the official GenderCare Tumblr. There is no doubt that he is advertising transition services. In this location, Lorimer does not share his wise appreciation of the power of digital photographic enhancement to act out our fantasies. Instead he offers age-appropriate ‘links to things I find diverting that are not especially relevant (cute animals)’:
Don’t worry, young person about your first trip to get T. You will meet a cuddly gender doc wearing a pink suit.
After all, this is all a game, a joke. Fun. Isn’t it?
Well I for one don’t think it is. My son, you see, became seriously depressed in his second year at university and developed sudden onset gender dysphoria. No earlier signs, easily the most ‘boyish’ of my boys. But after a romantic rejection and drug experimentation he developed depersonalization, googled his symptoms, found they were a symptom of trans, stopped washing, seeing his friends, his handwriting changed, he made odd repetitive hand movements, he became angry and he stayed up all night. I thought he was having a breakdown. His GP thinks it is depression or maybe schizophrenia. But, urged on by a counsellor, I in my naivete paid out for an assessment at GenderCare. After all, the clinicians were the real thing, weren’t they? They all worked at Charing Cross GIC in the NHS. They couldn’t be just cynical or stupid, could they?
I was astounded when my son came back telling me that he would be starting hormones in a few weeks. I emailed GenderCare and asked whether I could supply some contextual information. Lorimer contacted my son to ask permission (since he was 22 at the time). Son said yes, so I sent off a timeline of events, including details that I thought might be relevant to a diagnosis, including a series of recent traumatic events. Lorimer duly wrote a report saying he was a bit worried and wanted a second opinion. The second opinion was with his colleague at Charing Cross GIC, James Barrett (not the photographer, who could only have beautified my beautiful son digitally acting out his fantasies). As Barrett had no access to context (this time son said No), he had an avuncular chat with son (cost £200) and advised on choosing a new name and the right to access female toilets. My son, who a family therapy team thought was ‘struggling with his decision to transition’, now repeatedly refers to the fact that he has been ‘diagnosed by two gender experts’. But in this matter, there is no diagnosis: doctors simply echo back to patients their own self-diagnosis. And the first doctor to offer him that external recognition was Stuart Lorimer.
GenderCare combines accessibility to the young through its active presence on social media, with a show of clinical expertise. The recent news that the Charing Cross GIC would be run within the Tavistock and Portman NHS trust led Lorimer to comment on ‘that potentially big plus. Possibilities for great cross-fertilisation between child and adult services.’ He wouldn’t notice the crassness of the metaphor, because what Lorimer is breeding is a business model; the fertility of confused young people is neither here nor there.
ok, that’s the most horrifying post I’ve read yet on this website and there’s been some real doozies here. The absolute crassness and money grubbing that Lorimer exudes is just appalling.
GenderCare may have excellent intentions. The blog post tried to suggest the possible results of this kind of private clinic operation on a vulnerable group. It’s a genuinely complicated question but one that worries me very much indeed.
I’d love to know who owns them, who are partners or shareholders and who are paid staff.
Absolutely horrifying account. Nothing is worse for medicine than an anti-scientific ideology. I’m really sorry for everything you’re going through. Hopefully you’ll someday find yourself testifying in Dr. Lorimer’s malpractice trial.
Science is very much in support of transition, actually. Otherwise the NHS wouldn’t approve transition treatments, right? They’re very careful about that kind of thing, especially when it involves irreversible treatments like hormones and surgery.
That is a fallacy in the form of appeal to authority. The NHS has political pressure placed upon them by activists, and conflicting motivations do not make them an unbiased source, nor an expert on transition research. Medical history has many examples of doctors later admitting they were wrong and entire treatments being discarded.
No, there is not adequate science to support pediatric transition, and every parent that decides to do so has to sign waivers stating so. Youre assuming the evidence is there based on your opinion of the nhs. Acting as though the nhs isnt subject to political pressure is ridiculous. There have been several perinatal mortality scandals because of the nhs caving to the pressure of natural childbirth advocates. Children died.
I am a scientist, and I say that the science does NOT support transitioning. Most find that it isn’t the magic bullet they’ve been searching for. Suicide attempts among the (wholly or partially) medically transitioned are high, as are co-morbid mental illnesses. And no, most “gender doctors” are NOT careful in Rxing hormones and surgery. This appears to be about money. However, when society finally acknowledges this, these “gender doctors” will have absconded with the money, and the side effects (mental and physical) of an illusory transition will be felt by the patient / victims and their loved ones alone. Can’t ever really be something you’re not!
I am concerned about the reliance on ‘if the NHS does it it must be fine’. The NHS also pays a little more than lip service to homeopathy so in my view is fallible and can’t be put up on such a pedestal.
Not only that, but medical orgs in the USA and UK once supported lobotomies for questionable purposes. Only hindsight tells us it is wrong. At the time, doctors defended this quackery. Someday, srs will be seen as equally barbaric as gratuitous lobotomies. You don’t treat mental illness with surgeries on healthy body tissue.
@genderskeptics
>No, there is not adequate science to support pediatric transition
Dr Lorimer doesn’t treat children. He treats adults only at Charing Cross GIC and GenderCare treats only adults.
“Pediatric transition” literally consists of a child living in a different gender role – no hormones or surgery, no adult-approved transition treatments at all. Completely reversible, and only done if the child wants it.
Agreed Cassian. Lorimer treats mostly over 18s (sometimes over 17s in special circumstances). The blog simply asks us to think about the real people who are accessing these circumstances. It leaves us to draw our own conclusions.
Cassian, perhaps Lorimer doesn’t treat children (although above is a screenshot where he refers to a 17-year-old patient), but it is disturbing that he seems to be targeting and grooming children to become his future patients. If Lorimer can get his fun, hipster image in front of kids ages 11-17, he’s got them hooked in as ready-made patient$ once they turn 18.
The image he puts forth online to young people is a picture of a “fun guy” who will quickly get young adults what they want in the way of hormones and mastectomy. His casual, hipster “fun guy” attitude reminds me of a pediatrician’s office where there are brightly colored, kid-themed murals on the wall, toys all over the waiting room, and lollipops and stickers at the door, all to make children want to go see the doctor. But of course Lorimer is not promoting vaccines and wellness checks. He is selling plastic surgery and highly potent, potentially damaging drugs which cause permanent changes to a person’s body — and he’ll get them for young adults on demand, no psychotherapy needed.
Not only that, Lorimer made the deliberate choice to promote himself and his transition business on Tumblr of all places, the bastion of teen angst, social contagion and all things teen and trans. If a plastic surgeon used Tumblr to target young teen girls for the purpose of recruiting future breast enlargement and nose job patients, there would be an uproar, and for good reason. What Lorimer is doing is no different.
As for the supposed harmlessness and reversibility of pediatric “social transition,” see this post: //4thwavenow.com/2016/11/28/could-social-transition-increase-persistence-rates-in-trans-kids/
Lupron from puberty onset until 14-16, then cross sex hormones. You are arguing a lot for someone who literally doesn’t know anything about the topic.
This just isn’t true. Children are being given Lupron to delay puberty as early as age 9. Some are receiving cross sex hormones at age 12. Even the experts admit we have no way to differentiate between the children who will persists and those who will desist. Given that the large majority will desist, we are sterilizing children who might have been able to live happily as gays or lesbians. And there is evidence that social transition — and certainly blockers — will increase persistence.
And obviously you would be sterilizing kids period. No need to distinguish whether they grow up to be gay/lesbian/bi or grow up to be heterosexual. Their fertility will have been impacted.
I just thought of an analogy that’s a little more accurate than pediatricians’ offices featuring colorful murals, candy and toys: the “Joe Camel” cartoon character used in advertising by Camel Cigarettes. This “Joe Cool”-type character was an obvious appeal to young adults, but especially teens. Studies showed the Joe Camel ad campaign actually was more successful with children than adults; in fact, during this campaign, Camel became the most preferred brand of cigarettes among children who smoked. I see a definite parallel to Lorimer advertising his “hipster, fun guy” transitioning practice (complete with memorable, funky artwork on his business cards) on Tumblr.
Just for grins, here’s a link to a news article from 1991, which covers the Joe Camel controversy: http://www.nytimes.com/1991/12/11/us/smoking-among-children-is-linked-to-cartoon-camel-in-advertisements.html
This is so disturbing to me. What the heck has happened to “do no harm” in the medical field? Who in the heck polices these “doctor” who seem to be flagrantly cavalier towards these hurting young people. Are any of them parents?
That guy sounds like a class A narcissistic and naive quack. But with social media anyone can receive the praise they seek. It’s so obviously geared that way…
The platypus? Is a platypus. Born a platypus. DNA. And guess what? I’d think these doctors would learn in med school that DNA proves a man a man and a woman a woman.
The trans conversation is the modern version of The Emperor’s New Clothes. Who will tell the truth?
I’m am hoping those doctors who see the truth of this unnecessary and medically criminal carnage of healthy bodies will SPEAK OUT!
>I’m am hoping those doctors who see the truth of this unnecessary and medically criminal carnage of healthy bodies will SPEAK OUT!
Actually, the success rates of transition are very high. Most people feel happier and have a better quality of life after transition. Some rare people detransition, and some of those “retransition” at a better time of life, or realise they’re nonbinary.
You do not provide sources for your claims, nor any statistics on what many or rare means. Vague, unsubstantiated claims should be dismissed.
Detransition isn’t the only way a transition can fail. I have friends who have transitioned, and it didn’t seem to help them “become their true self” as advocates often claim, but they instead socially withdrew and became anxious, unstable people. I think it is unlikely that they will detransition because they’ve invested years into this identity, and sacrificed relationships in order to transition. It would be a public embarrassment to admit you were wrong about such a huge thing.
I hope my friends will eventually find happiness as they live in their chosen gender, but their happiness didn’t come from transition, that’s for sure.
@gerbby
>Detransition isn’t the only way a transition can fail. I have friends who have transitioned, and it didn’t seem to help them “become their true self” as advocates often claim, but they instead socially withdrew and became anxious, unstable people.
Indeed, unless you “pass” being visibly trans comes with its own set of problems, mainly transphobia. Anyone would find life much more difficult in the face of transphobia, I think. My understanding is the research shows that social support helps with this; people whose social circles consist of supportive family and friends who accept, trust and defend them. To put it another way, by being transphobic you are contributing to the problem there.
>I think it is unlikely that they will detransition because they’ve invested years into this identity, and sacrificed relationships in order to transition. It would be a public embarrassment to admit you were wrong about such a huge thing.
Maybe, maybe. But also maybe they are still happier in their “target” gender than they were in their birth-assigned gender, even with all of the stress and anxiety and depression. Since we’re apparently allowed speculation and anecdotes at this point in the game, I’ve never met a detransitioner but I’ve met lots and lots of trans people and they have all found transition *did* make things better and easier for them.
I’m thinking about how you personally find that trans people are less happy, detransitioners are common, etc. And I am thinking about how I meet trans people who come out to me and talk about how much better their lives are. I’m thinking that perhaps if you only meet people who detransition or regret transition, that might say something about you? Like, maybe trans people don’t like to come out to you or form lasting relationships with you because you think you know their genders better than they do, and other associated beliefs and behaviours that make you unpleasant for trans people to be around?
@LC
>You do not provide sources for your claims, nor any statistics on what many or rare means. Vague, unsubstantiated claims should be dismissed.
If any of us were scientists or doctors with any authority over the medical care of trans people I might agree with you. If this were a *Wikipedia article* I might also agree with you. But no, we are both humans having a human interaction and you’re just being nasty, dismissive, and rude.
The bulk of the research and gender identity clinician’s findings and experience are that transition is effective and successful. The entire scientific and medical community agrees. I am on the “popular” side of this debate. I’m afraid the onus is on you to argue your side and provide proof. But you don’t need to do that because I’m not in a position of authority, so don’t worry about it. We both know that showing me studies won’t make me go “gosh darn it you’re right! You win, because this is a game where you get points for citing studies or dismissing a study someone else cited, and I am not a scientist with a specialism in this field and I’m not able to launch an in-depth critical analysis of all of these journals for the sole vital reason of feeling like I won an internet argument.”
But we know this isn’t a game that I can win, right? This is a blog that has a very very very long article attempting to dismantle the reputation of a gender identity clinician who is popular and respected in the private and public health services, among patients and among other clinicians and medical professionals, because of the quality and results of his care. Happy trans people don’t hang out here on this blog among people who would make them feel terrible, which means I am one person disagreeing with a small mob of angry, rude people who are passionately into the idea that transition surgery is mutilation, who will demand scientific studies to back up something that is widely accepted worldwide, and who will use flawed, biased and outdated studies to try to discredit my personal experience and that of people close to me. There is nothing I can cite that will change your mind.
And that’s okay, I’m not here to win. If studies and facts would work and you would change your mind from me listing them here I guess I might consider it? But I’m fairly sure that wouldn’t work. None of you are specialist doctors or in charge of medical policy, and those are the people who understand and respond to supporting scientific evidence. You do not.
Plus, none of you have any power over me or my transition or my doctors, so I don’t have to persuade you either. (It’s no coincidence that the author’s child transitioned after they left home; I would love to ask the child in the article whether they would describe their gender dysphoria as “sudden onset”! Most trans people know that they’re trans for many years before they see a doctor about it, and many wait until they have left home when they know that their parent will block their treatment or kick them out.)
I only have to deal with people like you sometimes, if I choose to. You have to deal with the vast majority of the medical and scientific community, the United Nations, the British Government and the NHS, WPATH standards of care (internationally respected and followed), the Equality and Human Rights Commission and many other human rights organisations, and the fact that people other than cis men and women have been existing for as long as humans have existed, including trans women making HRT hormones from horse piss hundreds of years ago. You’re going to lose, no matter what I do. And because of the way you treat your trans loved ones, you are going to lose people close to you unless you start respecting (not scientific or political popular opinion but) people’s accounts of themselves and their experiences of their lives and genders. I mean, just the fact that you all seem to only know trans people who are miserable about being trans is evidence of that…! Happy transgender people stop hanging out with people like you because you treat them this way. Your sample is biased.
So, no, I don’t feel like citing sources would change your mind or do anything much. But I am pretty okay with this. You are already losing. You’re brittle and stuck and needlessly politicising people’s personal lives and trying to have authority over their bodies and medical treatments, and if the author of this article treats their child with the attitude that the article contains they’re going to lose the person they lovingly brought into this world and raised for two decades. That really sucks for them, and for all of you too. I don’t need to do anything.
Cassian, I would also like to see data confirming your claims. The only data I can find shows that suicide rates go up for those who have transitioned. “Those who have medically transitioned (45%) and surgically transitioned (43%) have higher rates of attempted suicide than those who have not (34% and 39% respectively).”
http://www.transcentralpa.org/_content/downloads/Preventing_Transgender_Suicide.pdf
Are we talking about customer satisfaction surveys or proper research of defined and properly measured objective outcomes?
@Cassian, I am not dismissing everything you say. I am engaging with you in open debate. However, debates require that you support your claims with facts or reasoned opinions. If you cannot do so, then you should not make the claim, or not expect anyone to believe it.
“The entire scientific and medical community agrees.”
I am sorry, but this is a lie. It would not require you to be a scientist or medical professional to know that this is a lie, as it is obvious you are exaggerating in order to justify your position. If you want to discuss the numbers of persons within the medical community who agree, you need to research the facts.
“I am not a scientist with a specialism in this field and I’m not able to launch an in-depth critical analysis of all of these journals for the sole vital reason of feeling like I won an internet argument”
Then there is also no need for you to get upset or say that I am being rude. I am not. I am treating you as I would any other adult that I am having an intellectual discussion with.
“who will use flawed, biased and outdated studies”
If the studies are flawed, biased, and outdated, then you should easily be able to research the facts and counter the arguments. If you cannot do so, or don’t wish to try, then it is unreasonable of you to expect me to change my mind. I asked for only one study: The one that would demonstrate the truth of your above statement.
“so I don’t have to persuade you either”
No one is required to engage in any debate. But you are making statements. If those statements are in error, you should expect to be corrected.
“Most trans people know that they’re trans for many years before they see a doctor about it”
You need to provide a source or citation for this claim.
“vast majority of the medical and scientific community”
You said earlier that the entire scientific and medical community agrees. You have not provided a source for either statement.
“people other than cis men and women have been existing”
This is not correct. Humans are a sexually dimorphic species incapable of changing sex. The surgery and drugs you are being given and are advocating for other people’s children to take have not existed before the last century. For the majority of recorded history, then, it would have been impossible for humans to be transgender in the manner you are suggesting. But I would be happy to hear you clarify what you mean by this statement.
Actually, Cassian, the first person I knew who transitioned started living full time as a woman in 2011. I became critical of the trans movement in 2014. Somehow I doubt that I destroyed her happiness three years before I even became guilty of thought crime. But then again, you seem to have appointed yourself the expert on my life. And here I thought you were a stranger on the internet.
Could you link to long-term research showing this please? Showing how people are doing 10 years after transition completed? I haven’t found any but I’m sure you must be speaking from a position of knowledge.
@LC
You’re assuming that I am here to debate, and you’re assuming that I’m trying to change your mind. I am not interested in debating, and I know that I can’t change your mind. I’m talking about my feelings and experiences and understanding, which I know you cannot relate to at all, in case it helps anyone reading this to see things from a different point of view.
People here are throwing a lot of studies at me here and I’m not really sure why. I feel like I’ve been pretty clear about not being interested in reading studies that back up your opinion, in the same way that I’m not interested in providing studies that back up mine. I am talking about my personal experience, and sometimes the personal experiences of people I know, and I’ve given the names of several respected organisations who agree with me because… well, that seems to be what you want from me? But I don’t know, I feel like you’re trying to goad me into something that you call a debate, but to me looks like me responding to your demands only to have them thrown back in my face. Which is… not a very open debatey environment, I’ve got to be honest. You are not behaving like enquiring open-minded people welcoming new information, even if debate is what you are after and what you think I want to do too.
@Cassian, what new information have you provided? I can’t evaluate the truth of your subjective experiences- indeed, you haven’t even given much insight into what they are. And that’s fine, as they have little to do with the ongoing debate about how to treat trans children, generally.
As you say, you’re not interested in listening to our perspective, and while that’s unfortunate, it is your choice to make. However, no one is going to seriously consider anything you have to say if they are aware that you have no interest in hearing their opinion or their experiences. In which case, what do you hope to accomplish?
“The plural of anecdote is not data.”
Scientist here! I do not agree with you, Cassian, so I just single-handedly disproved your 100% medical / scientific consensus.
I have no words. This is surreal.
I’ve been attending Charing Cross GIC, under the care of Dr Lorimer and various other doctors. I’ve definitely found Dr Lorimer to be knowledgeable and professional and very helpful. I’ve (slowly) received all the treatments I have needed, and I’m a lot happier now in my life.
You probably already know this but a person who’s FTM and taking testosterone isn’t a “young woman”, but a man. And your child, a trans person who was assigned male at birth but is taking hormones to fit a female role, is a woman. I hope she is supported in her transition and things turn out well for her, and I hope you don’t have too much trouble adjusting.
That is not accurate. The acronym FTM stands for ‘female to male’, which indicates that the person is a biological female who is attempting to disguise their secondary sex characters to appear male. As humans cannot change their sex, this person would be a female. A trans-claiming person who was identified as male at birth would be a male, for the same reason. Your own experiences are anecdotal and not helpful in addressing the problems faced by the son described above.
Everything here is about disrespecting a person and who they say they are. Putting aside politics and medicine, dismissing and contradicting a person’s experience so aggressively is at best rude and at worst hurtful. I feel bad for your daughter, who deserves a parent who loves and supports her no matter what instead of treating her like this.
I can’t speak for every parent on this site, but I think that most of us agree in principle that if an adult in sound mind wants to undergo medical transition, they have the right to do so and should be treated with respect by the law and the public.
But when we’re talking about kids and teens whose selves are still in the process of developing — both objectively, in terms of their biological brain structure, and subjectively, in terms of their own understanding of who they are — then parents have the right to ask questions in good faith and the right to expect coherent answers.
It’s not “disrespect” or “aggression” or “exclusion” to ask pointed questions, especially in the case of at-risk kids who already have preexisting mental health comorbidities (depression, anxiety, ASD) and didn’t display any interest in a cross-gender identity before being exposed to the social media trans subculture.
We understand that you’ve come here to defend the trans orthodoxy and that nothing we say is likely to convince you. But many of us have had this conversation many times before, and I think that if you continue to read through the posts and comments on this site with an open mind, you’ll see that 4thwavenow is a community of thoughtful, well-intentioned people (most of them political liberals!) motivated by a sincere concern for the young people caught up in the trans phenomenon.
(The above comment is addressed to Cassian, obviously, not LC.)
Cassian, “gender” is an intangible concept created and enforced by society. Sex is material truth. Someone claiming to be something does not make that claim a material reality. Those of us who have kids and young adults who claim to be transgender are not rude and aggressive with our children, but we may at times behave rudely and aggressively toward those who push abusive, permanent medical procedures on our kids, several of whom, by they way, have come to realize they are not trans after all. It is quite possible to support and love a confused young person without promoting extreme, irreversible medical procedures.
@Cassian, that is not correct. Disagreeing with someone is a form of respect. It is saying that they have a worthwhile opinion that is in error, and you wish to engage them in an intellectual debate to correct that error. An experience is subjective, and thus, it can be in error if it contradicts reality. I do not have a daughter, but I think it is very sad that adults have not spoken with you on an intellectually challenging manner in the past. That is a part of respecting people with whom we disagree.
Pretend I’m an alien. Define “woman” for me.
It would probably be wrong for me to do so. Gender is a subjective and unfalsifiable experience for everyone. Any definition I gave you would almost certainly exclude someone *here* reading this comment thread, never mind how it would go down among a larger group!
I can’t reply directly, but your entire comment relies on a coherent definition for man and woman. If it’s nebulous and subjective then it’s meaningless, so its a religious belief.
Cassian, if gender is so subjective that it can’t be defined, then there’s no reason any thinking person needs to take it seriously. We don’t have to abide by the indescribable subjective feelings of other people. When people want to be taken seriously, they have to make a coherent argument. People can have all the “genders” they want, but the reality of the body is still there. Our bodies come in male and female and that’s how we reproduce. Any subjective feelings people have do not eliminate the reality of the body.
@LC
There are many social phenomena that are entirely subjective, entirely human-created, that we take seriously and respect in other people. An example might be unconditionally loving your child for the rest of your life. An example that has legal backing is entering into a relationship with someone and having that recognised by law, by getting married. Something being a subjective experience does not mean that it can be dismissed. A person’s experience of a trauma is entirely subjective but also very real, and should be validated and taken seriously. When I am struggling with grief from the loss of a loved one someone might recommend that I see a counsellor, but no one would expect me to react to the death in the same way as, for example, one of my work colleagues.
I’m entertained that people are asking for my age and thinking that’s relevant. And I can’t work out why you’d ask. If I’m older, I’m like Lorimer, grooming kids for transition for… some kind of trans army? To take over… the NHS? And if I’m younger, I’ve been indoctrinated. Either way you’re going to invalidate my views, right? So, I think this is probably where I step out. Demanding citations for everything a newcomer says is weird and hostile and very unwelcoming. It reminds me a lot of the term “sealioning”, which Quora defines as “the name given to a specific, pervasive form of aggressive cluelessness, that masquerades as a sincere desire to understand.” And now you’re asking for my age, as though it might explain something fundamental about my point of view, in a way that very much feels like you’re going to dismiss me regardless.
So I’ll bow out. I’m sorry that you find your political ideology more important than listening to and having a good relationship with your child, OP. Take care. o7
“There are many social phenomena that are entirely subjective, entirely human-created, that we take seriously and respect in other people.”
Yes, there are. And I fully believe that you believe your gender identity is real. But love and grief are intangible emotions. A marriage contract is a physical reality, just as the definition of ‘gender’ and ‘sex’ are part of a physical reality. If someone has a subjective feeling of being married, they are mistaken. It is not disrespectful to tell them they are not married despite this belief, it is respecting that they are capable of accepting reality.
Same with someone who may believe they are a member of the opposite sex(or can become so). I say sex instead of gender because gender is the set of social stereotypes ascribed to men and women. A person can follow a stereotype, but they cannot identify as one, and as it is a stereotype, a great deal of variation will be present in actual members of that group. Sex, however, is tangible, and cannot be altered.
“Demanding citations for everything a newcomer says is weird and hostile and very unwelcoming.”
It is always wise to find out what definitions and information a group has before stating things that appear to be your opinion. If your opinion has facts to back them up, you should be prepared to present these facts and expect to be challenged by people who know as much or more about the topic. If you join an advanced philosophy group and declare on the first day that Plato is the best philosopher, there are people who will disagree, and demand that you justify that claim. In that particular instance, I guarantee that most of them will not be as nice about it as I’ve been :).
“And now you’re asking for my age”
I don’t think you should tell anyone your age, as it isn’t relevant.
“very much feels like you’re going to dismiss me regardless”
I’m sorry you feel that way. I hope you find happiness with your decision.
If the resources and support given to gender confused individuals was instead invested in Autistic Spectrum Support a lot of this would be avoided and the right solutions found, WITHOUT CHEMICALS or SURGERY . But it isn’t trendy, money making or visually dramatic. It is lack of expertise that leads to mis diagnosis and the wrong treatment.
A study on the connection between transgenderism and autism is very important and must happen. According to Tavistock clinic, HALF of their under-18 gender clinic patients are on the spectrum. Something’s gotta give on this. Until this connection is better understood, I believe a moratorium should be placed on prescribing cross-sex hormones and performing transgender surgical procedures on those who are on the autism spectrum.
Cassian, may I ask how old you are?
Dr. Lorimer clearly has a lot of loyal patients. I am wondering if all of you have complete faith that long-term use of testosterone by people whose chromosomes are xx is truly a safe course of action. No one commenting here in support of transition seems to have any safety concerns whatsoever. I am wondering how many years you’ve all been using T. (Not speaking to xy people using cross sex hormones as this appears to be somewhat less hazardous and at the very least, less experimental.)
Instead of assuming the parents who object are merely bitter, phobic, insensitive, and in denial … perhaps consider that some of us are a lot less confident that long-term off-label use of T in a person with xx chromosomes is safe. It doesn’t help that seemingly every couple weeks comes another report regarding the dangers of T supplementation even in xy people. Good parents are responsible for keeping their kids safe. There comes a point when this is impossible but you cannot fault us for trying, nor assume that there’s no reasonable cause for concern.
Come back and lecture us about our resistance and needless objections after you’ve been on T for 10 or 20 years, and can give us some research reflecting good safety in xx people over the LONG TERM. Reports from the honeymoon period are going to be less persuasive. If someone could show me good science that it is SAFE I’d be a lot less resistant, that’s for damn sure. It doesn’t exist.
I strongly suspect that Cassian is very young.
@Puzzled
T, huh? You seem to have assumed an awful lot about me and my transition. I’ve told you nothing about my reproductive organs or any treatments I may or may not have had.
I don’t know anything about T in the long term, that’s not really something that interests me. I do know that blockers have been used for decades in children with premature puberty type things, and that it has no adverse effects with regard to the puberty that does happen when the child stops taking blockers, has no effect on fertility, etc.
I know, I know, you want sources. 😉 I’m not gonna give them to you, they’re there if you look. You could probably ask some gender identity clinic doctors for some.
I said zip regarding blockers; my kid’s not at that stage. I only talked about T in xx bodied people. You can’t point me to sources that affirm that it’s safe long-term because … they don’t exist. If you think I haven’t looked then you’re not worth having this discussion with. I’m sorry it doesn’t “interest you.”
Canadian: I know I’m wasting my time, by are you really going to argue that “Puberty blockers” (drugs like LUPRON) are safe & have no long term side effects? It is often used to fight cancer because it kills cells, unfortunately healthy cells too. Pregnant women can’t use it b/c of the severe birth defects (fetus is cells). That’s why women with endometriosis have been treated with it – to prevent the growth of fibroids (cells). Since chemotherapy has similar effects, would putting someone without cancer(a child especially) on chemo be ok???
You keep saying look it up, but I don’t think you have / want to acknowledge the facts. Regardless of your feelings about this issue, denying health risks is irresponsible.
I’d be hesitant to trust anyone who tells people different. It’s a lie. If “gender specialists” have told you this, or anyone else, their medical license should be revoked! Besides, even if they hypothetically weren’t aware of the side effects, then it would still be a lie to say it isn’t harmful, because they wouldn’t know since using it this way is all new territory. (The people who used it for other reasons in the past, were strictly limited & still reported severe side effects. Researchers said the same)
The drug manufacturer has this information … You know, the ones that make it & make $ (I’m not an anti pharmaceutical person either, just pointing out that even those who profit, admit the risk!)
It’s irresponsible, immoral, and deviant for anyone – trans or not, to misinform others, especially children/teens who want to know the truth.
I rather people be honest & say they accepted the risk to be happy, then to misled others by saying puberty blockers are reversible & have little side effects. People here aren’t talking about adults, they are talking about their children. What good is *passing* these kids die in their 30’s from possible cancer, or are severely disabled for life & in pain. I doubt they will be worried about how good they look. Even risking auto immune disease isn’t fun, and causes life long suffering.
Here is good information about it (all cited)
http://lupronvictimshub.com
So yeah, sure they used it in women in the past for conditions. That proves nothing b/c those women paid the price. The information I’m providing comes from the women’s health organization. so no bias about the drug for trans. It discusses people who have used it for other reasons like you stated, but it tells a different story. So don’t down play like you did here: “I do know that blockers have been used for decades in children with premature puberty type things, and that it has no adverse effects with regard to the puberty that does happen when the child stops taking blockers, has no effect on fertility, etc.”
TAP Pharmaceuticals reported to the FDA in April 1998 that they were ‘concerned’ because more than 1/3 of the women they studied who took Lupron® did not ‘demonstrate either partial reversibility’ or ‘a trend toward return’ of bone mass. Researchers noted some women lost as much as 7.3 % of their bone density during treatment (2x the amount the drug’s packaging lists in its warnings.)
The FDA reports that, as long ago as 1999, it had received adverse drug reports about Lupron® from 4,228 women and 2,943 men.1 These side effects included: tingling, itching, headache and migraine, dizziness, severe joint pain, difficulty breathing, chest pain, nausea, depression, emotional instability, dimness of vision, fainting, weakness, amnesia, hypertension, muscular pain, bone pain, nausea/vomiting, asthma, abdominal pain, insomnia, chronic enlargement of the thyroid, liver function abnormality, vision abnormality, and anxiety, and others.2 In 325 of these cases, the women required hospitalization; 25 women died.3 At the time, the FDA said that it did not have enough staff capacity to assess any causal effect in these cases.
Surveys conducted by the Endometriosis Research Center (a patient advocacy group) with women who took Lupron® has indicated that over half of the respondents (51.67%) experienced side effects lasting for longer than six months; for almost one-quarter (23%) of the women, side effects lasted longer than five years.5 Other clinical studies have found that almost three-quarters (72%) of women taking Lupron® experience memory difficulties, and that these memory problems can last as long as six months after the study was conducted.6 – See more at: https://www.nwhn.org/lupron-what-does-it-do-to-womens-health/#sthash.PqCf6CJb.dpuf
Yep, “horrifying” is the only word for this. And the fact that a gay man is doing this makes it even worse.
Evil. I don’t say “insane” because I think this guy and his global trans industry colleagues are not insane. They know what they’re doing. They’re just evil.
I understand why you say that but I really don’t think these people are evil. I think they are motivated by the best of intentions. The results are what worry me.
I think their intentions are $$$.
SunMum, thank you for writing this. I have a daughter who also developed rapid-onset “gender dysphoria” and self-diagnosed as transgender. She attends a different clinic, just one of many now that operate based on informed consent. As an 18-year-old In a single day she was able to get a prescription to start testosterone.
I see my daughter misinterpreting what her brain is telling her, succumbing to extreme stress and anxiety during her senior year of high school, with the anxiety turned onto her body, and everything about what she is doing is body image related. Yet, once she named it transgender, it was all over. No clinician could question and help her work through what happened.
Despite the fact that our extended family has a soup of mental health diagnoses….depression, bipolar, anxiety, OCD, ADHD….she was able to start hormone therapy, trusting an impulsive teen’s ability to self-diagnose and be able to adequately weigh the pros and cons of this decision.
Transgender has become an industry indeed. How does one gauge “Do No Harm?” I wonder how many Dr. Lorimers there are out there.
Lorimer et al are the top end of the gender specialism discipline. These are the stars of that world. That’s what worries me. And I know that many people share my concerns.
They are the “stars” yet do little or no original research or follow up. They just do whatever their conscience allows, and not everyone has one. There is no reason or regulation. They provide a want in exchange for money, regardless of whether it will harm or help.
Your pulling of the measurement of Dr Lorimers patient numbers from a single tweet has me wondering if you’d also believe he charges for teaching his milkshake method?! As it turns out, one glance down the gendercare twitter feed sees me giggling away at the idea of the service being run by cats having you cowering in the corner.
The essential point here is that both Twitter and Tumblr are areas where it is mutually understood that humour is permissable, and for Gendercare to treat them this way is not a reflection of their ability to assess patients and the extrapolation as such only serves to become a weak argument.
About the only evidence on here worth analysing are the two letters regarding the grey area of gender practice. They are the only official gendercare output meant for patients and the change of tone is clear. What you, for balance, fail to note is that these letters are open, honest and explanatory- everything I would want from a medical professional. Clearly to you this can be cast aside with a single anonymous tweet.
What you have been through is unfortunate, however I don’t see you being representative of every Trans parent or patient and for balance it would be lovely to see statistics of Trans success rates, failures rates and rejected case rates to back up your assertions that Dr Lorimer is building a business (Shocking news: Medical professional works for NHS and sees private patients!) with no consideration for fertility (News just In: Clinical Psychologist puts long established right to gender of patients ahead of ability to procreate, even when it is what the patients want!).
I, of course, wish you and your child the best.
The post leaves it up to the reader to decide whether there is anything inappropriate about the operation.
‘Humour is permissible’ you say. Think about that a little.
While it seems that OddSock’s post is negative in tone about the original post, it’s a little hard to parse through what exactly seems to be the problem. Maybe you could try again and let us know exactly what you find to be problematic.
If you feel that we are unfair in finding fault or feeling that Dr. Lorimer’s “hot, hungry, horny” tweet is in poor taste, and unbecoming for someone who claims to be a qualified physician, I think we will have to agree to disagree. Frankly, as a parent it verges on shocking to read such material from someone who claims to know – not as well as I do – but BETTER than I do, what is right for my daughter. Most people would agree that Dr. L’s tweets do not evidence a mature, seasoned professional who appears to have a good sense of propriety and boundaries.
If you were seeing an oncologist, or transplant doctor, or a vascular surgeon, who had such a flippant attitude towards his patients and his procedures, I wonder if that might give you pause.
In terms of this remark, “(News just In: Clinical Psychologist puts long established right to gender of patients ahead of ability to procreate, even when it is what the patients want!),” it might be helpful to read a bit on pediatric transition, and child psychology. It is indeed true that most children, at the age of 9, 11, or even 15 or 17, cannot accurately forecast their future feelings about reproduction. Most children and teenagers do not, actually, always know with complete accuracy what they will want for themselves in the future. That is why there are parents, who help their children and teens make decisions to preserve options and not foreclose them in favor of what may turn out to be passing trends.
It is one thing to be a fully functioning adult, out in society, educated, working, and paying taxes. That person can make the decision to forego having children – it is why very few people, for instance, would object to a grown man’s decision to have a vasectomy. But it is intellectually dishonest to conflate that decision-making process with that of a young child.
We have to be clear that Lorimer only sees 17 year olds and over. Mature wise 17 and 18 year olds who know who they are, have always known and always will. Having seen over 4000 patients he can see into their souls in an hour.
Yeah. Regardless of whether we suspect that anything untoward is going on, the fact is that it’s simply unprofessional. Heck, I’d even think twice about, let’s say, an accounting firm with a cutesy Tumblr or Twitter account. (“It’s time once again for the government to take your money. Give some of it to us and we’ll do your taxes for you! Rofl!”) Not because frivolous tweets are proof of dishonesty or anything, but because anyone who would do such a thing is clearly a dumbass who doesn’t know how to project a professional image in the contexts where it’s important to do so. And I’d say that pretty much any situation where you are speaking for your organization is one of those.
If Lorimer had a Tumblr for the purposes of Q&A, combating misinformation, and generally educating the public in his area of expertise*, that would be another thing entirely. That’s what a serious adult would do. But it looks like he’s more interested in being down with the cool kids, or whatever. (Especially on Twitter — it doesn’t look like he has a lot of Tumblr posts, unless some have been deleted.)
*Whether he is in fact competent to educate the public on certain issues is another question; I will remain agnostic on this, as it is beyond the scope of my point in this post.
Horrifying. I wonder what the GMC will think about him touting for business (grooming?) on tumblr? He only treats adults but as we all know the age of 18 is an arbitrary cut off point which does not signify maturity, and these kids will be on the starting blocks. If he were in the business of cosmetic surgery (which he kind of is) he would be governed by these guidelines
http://www.gmc-uk.org/guidance/news_consultation/27171.asp. I would have thought this is the minimum he should be adhering to, exercising caution with young people and those with mental health issues. He wouldn’t even have got a second opinion if you hadn’t intervened first. SunMum you might want to make a complaint. http://www.gmc-uk.org/concerns/30428.asp – may not carry weight as you are not the patient. Perhaps discuss with your gp?
I keep trying to get a reality check on my attitude to all this. Are we all dinosaurs who are simply out of step with modern thinking (perhaps like parents in the fifties not accepting homosexuality)?
But then I remember that we are talking about very young adults, many with comorbid psychiatric and developmental challenges, undertaking serious irreversible medical procedures. And I weep.
I agree that it’s crucial to do a daily dinosaur check. But the answer I come up with is that we are talking about often irreversible body modification. Only homophobes have tried to alter bodies to prevent homosexuality. It is the medicalisation of identity that worries me, not anything to do with identity itself. We are calling for a gentler, more holistic, more tolerant approach to identity. We are calling for a more complex understanding of the mind and of the body. We are calling for protection for the vulnerable: those on the autism spectrum and young gay and lesbian adults who are exploring their identities.
I know too many trans people who no longer speak to their parents because of parents flat out denial, or active attempts to sabotage their transition.
I’ve seen lots of parents, apparently unable to move beyond the denial stage of grief, lash out at friends, doctors, websites, and so on, in the presumably mistaken belief that it will make their child “see sense”. Rarely do they stop to ask WHY their child felt unable to share their deepest secret for all those years, WHY they were so ashamed.
You’re going to lose your child if you don’t find a better way of dealing with this. I’m sorry to be the bearer of bad news, but I’ve seen this happen too many times, and it’s always a tragedy.
Thanks. This is an argument t I have heard many times. Did you watch ‘Transgender Kids: Who knows best?’ by any chance?
Can’t address the substance of the post, eh?
This isn’t an argument. This is emotional abuse and blackmail.
Wow. I try to avoid accusing the trans community of predatory motives — in general, I think that social media trans culture, and the associated push by adult activists to transition kids and teens, are cases of “the blind leading the blind” rather than a deliberate attempt to brainwash vulnerable young people or do them harm.
But Dr. Lorimer really does come across as a cynical businessman using the trans fad to line his pockets. The whole setup resembles a hip lifestyle startup — his up-to-the-minute facial hair and stylishly minimalist business cards are a carefully crafted marketing pitch aimed squarely at college-aged kids into alternative pop culture, as is his Tumblr presence. I find it hard to believe that he doesn’t know exactly what he’s doing.
It’s interesting that some surgeons are now describing voluntary mastectomy as “non-binary” rather than “trans” surgery. This seems like a tacit concession to the growing number of vocal FTM desisters, designed to avoid the uncomfortable admission that a woman with a mastectomy (or a man with a vaginoplasty) is still their natal biological sex. We saw this rhetoric in Julia Serano’s response to Cari’s detransition survey (a masterpiece of definitional Three Card Monte), and we’re seeing it play out in these comments with Cassian’s recitation of the new orthodoxy, in which gender is so ineffably subjective that it’s a personal affront even to ask for basic definitions.
But saying that the point of trans surgery is to bring human bodies in line with an “in between” subjective identity strikes at trans ideology’s entire public sales pitch. Transition has been sold to a skeptical public with the narrative that it’s a therapeutic procedure intended to correct an “obvious” medical problem. Trans people have X brains in Y bodies, Science(tm) has proven it, end of story; you wouldn’t deny your kid a lifesaving medical treatment if they had cancer, would you?
Cosmetic androgyny is a much harder sell. I think that in their heart of hearts, at least some adult trans activists, particularly high-achieving “STEM-T-F” natal males, see the end game as a world of voluntary cosmetic gender-swapping (an age-old science fiction trope in writers like Robert Heinlein and Philip Jose Farmer.) But that’s the opposite of the “born this way” politicized identity group narrative and of the “transition as therapy” narrative.
That’s an astute comment on the motivation behind the new idea of non-binary surgery. At Gendered Intelligence the parent coordinator simply said that if her trans son wanted to detransition he could have a boob job! A frankly cavalier view of surgery.
What a callous and unloving comment for that parent to make about her child. When breasts are removed, scars are left over and there can be nerve damage causing pain or numbness. Then to get artificial breasts added in on top of the pain/numbness where the breasts used to be would be horrendous. People are not Mr Potato Head toys that can mix and match body parts on a whim. Each of these surgeries is an injury and no mother should wish this upon her child.
A frankly cavalier view of surgery.
Yes, exactly. One of my “peak trans” experiences was reading a well-regarded blogger on trans issues describe vaginoplasty as an aftermarket user upgrade unlocking the exciting possibility of penetrative vaginal sex for natal males — you know, like adding a better graphics card to your computer to make video games more exciting. And this wasn’t some random crackpot on Tumblr, it was a well-known writer and activist, an FTM natal female who has written thoughtfully about the connection between their trans identity and their autism. Even taken charitably, as an exaggerated metaphor, this is a delusional line of thinking with a terribly naive understanding of what major reconstructive surgery actually entails. (And that’s before we get into the “surgery for thee but not for me” attitude of some adult trans activists…)
I have to wonder whether the coordinator in your group has ever been a surgical patient herself. Even medically necessary surgery can be profoundly difficult and traumatic, leading to a host of somatic issues that take time and effort to recover from — especially for young people whose relationship to their body is still developing.
@heteronerd
>It’s interesting that some surgeons are now describing voluntary mastectomy as “non-binary” rather than “trans” surgery.
I might be able to help here. I would say that the surgery would be called a “trans” surgery, but it might be considered a nonbinary surgery if the person having the mastectomy is nonbinary – and it would, for a nonbinary person, be perhaps a trans surgery *and* a nonbinary surgery.
If a binary person, a trans man, were to get a double mastectomy and a doctor was to call it a nonbinary surgery, that trans man would probably consider that a bit of a red flag. They’d probably say something like, “it’s not a nonbinary surgery, because I’m not nonbinary and it’s my surgery.”
Okay, I see the distinction here: mastectomy is a “trans” surgery if the patient identifies as trans, “non-binary” if the patient identifies as non-binary. But would you agree, if only for the sake of discussion, that this is very different from the way in which gender identity issues are typically presented to the public and to concerned parents?
We are told that the purpose of transitioning young people is to halt or prevent the development of secondary sex characteristics and to enable them to live a convincing adult life as their “true gender.” This is often spoken of as an urgent medical emergency, in the same way that we’d rush a cancer patient to chemotherapy; if we hesitate to approve medical transition right now, we are killing kids. (This is most heartbreaking when it’s presented as a suicide threat: “would you rather have a dead daughter or a live son”?)
But if it’s possible for someone to want gender surgery for reasons other than a desire to present as the opposite sex, this raises a whole host of questions about the trans ideology. (I’ll continue to use mastectomy as an example, but these questions also apply to hormones and puberty blockers, and to MTF as well as FTM transpeople.)
If someone has a mastectomy while identifying as “trans,” but later desists in favor of identifying as a woman or as non-binary, were they ever really trans? If not, does this mean that it’s possible for someone to be wrong about their own identity? If so, doesn’t this prove that gender identity is fluid (and thus not necessarily a “now or never” medical issue?) From an outside medical perspective, what is the difference between desisting post-op and returning to an identity as a woman, and desisting post-op and identifying as non-binary? Is mastectomy for a non-binary identity an urgent medical issue, in the same way that it supposedly is for a trans male identity? If so, is this true for all non-binary people, or just some of them?
I assume that “non-binary” doesn’t mean (or isn’t exclusive to) the very small group of people with medical intersex conditions, like Turner’s or Klinefelter’s Syndromes, which can be detected by an outside observer using impartial biological markers. But if some gender identities are based in an entirely subjective feeling of “in-between-ness,” does this mean that gender activists aren’t telling the truth when they assure us that there are “male brains” and “female brains” and that the point of surgery is to bring brains in harmony with bodies?
If the purpose of the gender identity movement is to encourage a spectrum of alternatives to mainstream sex role stereotypes, why do we need to rush young people into surgery? Wouldn’t experimentation with dress and culture serve the same purpose? (For the record, I say this as a former gender-nonconforming teenage boy who found a home in goth and glam rock.)
You’ve said that you don’t believe the commenters here are asking questions in good faith, and it’s your prerogative to respond or not. But do you think that these questions are intrinsically unfair or unreasonable? Can you see why, in the absence of clear or coherent answers to these questions, reasonable people might be skeptical about the trans ideology?
For my own situation, I want my XX kid to take the time for what I’ve called “due diligence”…being sure something else isn’t going on. This idea that hit home to a 17-year-old’s stressed brain deserves due diligence via medical tests and mental health diagnostic testing and counseling, certainly deserves more time to think it all through. I can think of various mental health issues that should be treated first before any irreversible changes are made. My kid had some earlier signs of OCD and I see where that can result in a body image focus misdiagnosed (by my teen) as transgender. Indeed her explanations are all very body image related.
Yes, it is much better if the family stays supportive. But in my situation, there was no chance for dialogue. Sexuality “coming out” is one thing, but “coming out” that essentially means their birth certificate has an error on it deserves some respectful dialogue with those who created this person, especially when the behavior is so out-of-the-blue and feels like something might be going on. Puberty brought crying and anxiety, but this is certainly not unusual in female puberty…and I told her I had the same issue. No, there was only the expectation that I agree with the internet-fed belief and internet-fed instructions pronounced to me by my daughter that she is now my son, and I just need to see that she is happy now as he. Happy to morph her body after starting HRT via an informed consent clinic, in a very impulsive/obsessed manner. Testosterone treatment for OCD?
And I should be unquestionably on board with this? That doesn’t feel like good parenting to me, whether or not my child is legal age. So I continue to urge caution and consider underlying issues in my now 19-year-old…still a teen taking on an adult decision…nineTEEN. A child who surrounded herself/himself with like-minded souls only. Sometime the love we show is tough love. Tough on all involved.
I am fascinated that this blog is seen as an attack on Lorimer given that it is made up from Lorimer’s and Barrett’s own words. Are their allies ashamed of what they have written? Is this not as Barrett says a ‘drastic and irreversible’ form of therapy?
And to all those who know my kids’s gender, state of health (mental and physical), living situation, relationship with me and future life chances on the basis of this blog entry I say a big Thank You! Your powers of comprehension and prediction are extraordinary!
They repeat the quasi-religious dogma without considering the nuance of the situation or the reality of the flesh-and-blood human being affected by it.
No, we’re just speaking from experience.
SunMum,
I personally find the evidence here very disturbing & I hope your son’s situation improves.
You mentioned that your son’s handwriting changed. Do you think that was that a conscious decision on his part or do you think might it have been the result of some medical issue?
I ask because handwriting is an interest of mine and I once noticed a male-to-trans person asking for advice on how to make his handwriting more feminine, which I thought was revealing, because although in centuries past woman and men were sometimes deliberately taught different styles of writing (the idea being that writing was merely an ornament for a woman, but a tool of business, learning and communication for a men) I have never seen any convincing evidence that men and woman “naturally” write differently.
I think that the idea that handwriting can be made more feminine is something which reflects imposed gender ideas, rather than men and women naturally writing differently.
Well that’s a fascinating idea. In this case no, I don’t think so. It seemed more like a deep breakdown. I photographed his obsessive doodles. He would leave most of the page blank and draw jagged shapes and broken lines as if his map of the world had fragmented. It was and is very disturbing. His eyes changed. He underwent a total personality change. He lost all his friends (all theoretically onboard with trans). So no this was not a conscious choice. Totally well according to the gender specialists.
It really sounds as if your son is mentally ill. Seek help!
This is what doctors who take their oath seriously say:
Gender Ideology Harms Children
The American College of Pediatricians urges educators and legislators to reject all policies that
condition children to accept as normal a life of chemical and surgical impersonation of the opposite
sex. Facts – not ideology – determine reality.
1. Human sexuality is an objective biological binary trait: “XY” and “XX” are genetic markers
of male and female, respectively – not genetic markers of a disorder. The norm for human
design is to be conceived either male or female. Human sexuality is binary by design with the
obvious purpose being the reproduction and flourishing of our species. This principle is self-evident.
The exceedingly rare disorders of sex development (DSDs), including but not limited to testicular
feminization and congenital adrenal hyperplasia, are all medically identifiable deviations from the
sexual binary norm, and are rightly recognized as disorders of human design. Individuals with DSDs
do not constitute a third sex.1
2. No one is born with a gender. Everyone is born with a biological sex. Gender (an
awareness and sense of oneself as male or female) is a sociological and psychological
concept; not an objective biological one. No one is born with an awareness of themselves as
male or female; this awareness develops over time and, like all developmental processes, may be
derailed by a child’s subjective perceptions, relationships, and adverse experiences from infancy
forward. People who identify as “feeling like the opposite sex” or “somewhere in between” do not
comprise a third sex. They remain biological men or biological women.2,3,4
3. A person’s belief that he or she is something they are not is, at best, a sign of confused
thinking. When an otherwise healthy biological boy believes he is a girl, or an otherwise healthy
biological girl believes she is a boy, an objective psychological problem exists that lies in the mind
not the body, and it should be treated as such. These children suffer from gender dysphoria. Gender
dysphoria (GD), formerly listed as Gender Identity Disorder (GID), is a recognized mental disorder in
the most recent edition of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of the American Psychiatric
Association (DSM-V).5
The psychodynamic and social learning theories of GD/GID have never been
disproved.2,4,5
4. Puberty is not a disease and puberty-blocking hormones can be dangerous. Reversible or
not, puberty- blocking hormones induce a state of disease – the absence of puberty – and inhibit
growth and fertility in a previously biologically healthy child.6
5. According to the DSM-V, as many as 98% of gender confused boys and 88% of gender
confused girls eventually accept their biological sex after naturally passing through puberty.5
American College of Pediatricians • August 2016 • http://www.ACPeds.org
6. Children who use puberty blockers to impersonate the opposite sex will require cross-sex
hormones in late adolescence. Cross-sex hormones (testosterone and estrogen) are
associated with dangerous health risks including but not limited to high blood pressure,
blood clots, stroke and cancer.7,8,9,10
7. Rates of suicide are twenty times greater among adults who use cross-sex hormones and
undergo sex reassignment surgery, even in Sweden which is among the most LGBQT –
affirming countries.11 What compassionate and reasonable person would condemn young children
to this fate knowing that after puberty as many as 88% of girls and 98% of boys will eventually
accept reality and achieve a state of mental and physical health?
8. Conditioning children into believing a lifetime of chemical and surgical impersonation of
the opposite sex is normal and healthful is child abuse. Endorsing gender discordance as
normal via public education and legal policies will confuse children and parents, leading more
children to present to “gender clinics” where they will be given puberty-blocking drugs. This, in turn,
virtually ensures that they will “choose” a lifetime of carcinogenic and otherwise toxic cross-sex
hormones, and likely consider unnecessary surgical mutilation of their healthy body parts as young
adults.
A link to this statement is found at: http://www.acpeds.org/the-college-speaks/positionstatements/gender-ideology-harms-children
Michelle A. Cretella, M.D.
President of the American College of Pediatricians
Quentin Van Meter, M.D.
Vice President of the American College of Pediatricians
Pediatric Endocrinologist
Paul McHugh, M.D.
University Distinguished Service Professor of Psychiatry at Johns Hopkins Medical School and the
former psychiatrist in chief at Johns Hopkins Hospital
I highly recommend any readers unfamiliar with Tumblr culture to go have a peek, just to see why parents like myself are concerned about Dr. Lorimer’s behavior.
Tumblr is populated primarily by teens, many who profess mental health problems. A mind-boggling number of them believe they’re transgender. Tumblr is where my daughter was introduced to transgender ideology and made many trans friends. It didn’t take her long to come to the conclusion that she was also transgender–a belief she held firm to for about a year.
Many parents report their children suddenly feel transgender after binging on social media. Frequently that social media platform is Tumblr. It is well known as an outpost for trans-identifying youth.
The fact that Dr. Lorimer is on Tumblr, interacting with young people in this manner and virtually handing out his business cards should raise alarm bells. His behavior is indefensible.
Here’s but one example of a confused ex-trans Tumblr kid telling her own story.
https://np.reddit.com/r/SJWstories/comments/3mc0eq/i_used_to_be_a_radical_genderfluid_tumblr_user/
Saintmagdalena,
The link you provided did not work. Try this:
https://www.acpeds.org/the-college-speaks/position-statements/gender-ideology-harms-children
That is much better! Thanks.
Even though I agree 100 percent with The American College of Pediatricians on their stance of gender identity issues for children ….. I still have to say that I cringe when this group is cited on this blog. From what I can tell most commenters on 4th Wave now are very pro gay rights and the American College of Pediatricians has some very controversial views that in my opinion are harmful and borderline homophobic. I just finished reading about Leelah Alcorn again. This whole issue is so very very complex. Did Leelah come to believe she was transgender because being a feminine homosexual young man would have been so difficult and unaccepted in a conservative environment that Leelah felt that being trans was a better outcome. I believe that maybe if Leelah had been given support as a gay boy things may have turned out very differently. So so heartbreaking for that child. I just really believe this whole gender identity issue is way way more complex than what gender clinics are pushing… girl brain in boy body- born that way. These kids need slow introspective and non judgmental therapy first. Why is that so hard for these clinics to see? We are , once again, looking for the quick answer. In the meantime their is a whole generation of beautiful healthy young people being confused and manipulated by all of this. My heart absolutely is breaking for all of them. They deserve so much better than to be sold a panacea that we don’t know the long term effects (both physically and mentally) of. I know this was a bit off topic in regards to original post but I just think it’s probably better not to cite The American College of pediatrics . I don’t want newcomers to this site to get the impression that the people who come here are anti LGB because that does not seem to be the case at all.
I did not know that. I don’t think anything is off topic as all topics within this issue when deconstructed bleed into each other.
Yes, that is the first question which has yet to be answered. Why no intensive neutral psychotherapy before the physical assault on healthy bodies.
As hard as it is to believe for me, the reality is there are plenty of wolves in sheep’s clothing. They don’t really care about their prey except for how it will satisfy their personal short term agenda.
Saint Magdalena – it’s so frustrating and absolutely pathetic that the only professionals in the U.S. willing to publicly speak out about the trans movement are very conservative. That is why ,I think, so many liberals have a hard time seeing the truths that are being spoken. Politics are so very divisive in the States and it’s sad that we can’t seem to read and think critically and form our own opinions. To me this is terrifying that we are putting our politics before children’s rights . People will just completely dismiss information if it doesn’t come from an “approved sight”. I know this whole topic has really opened my eyes. We should be able as intelligent people to recognize truth no matter where the truth is coming from. Like I said… I absolutely agree with all the statements The American College of Pediatrics has made on the topic of gender confusion. It’s just sad that so many will read where the statement is coming from and without hesitation completely dismiss the truths of the particular statement.
Yes, exactly. It’s so frustrating and upsetting — once trans issues became a partisan football in the American culture war, all nuanced discussion went out the window. It’s taken for granted in progressive media that the only possible reason someone might question the “gender identity” dogma is because they’re a supporter of the far right.
As an educated white-collar liberal in a deep blue American city, I despair of ever getting my concerns across to people who haven’t had a direct personal encounter with rapid-onset dysphoria. “What do you mean, ‘a youth subculture driven by social media groupthink’? That’s not what NPR and the Times say. There’s a great Netflix series with Jeffrey Tambor that you should watch to learn more about these issues. You didn’t vote for Trump, did you?”
It’s been such a relief to have this site to remind me that I’m not alone.
From one “educated white-collar liberal in a deep blue American city” to another, let’s keep coming out of the closet!
The trans identity agenda seems to be generated by an evangelical belief system, same as the anti-gay right, the planet would be a much safer tolerant place without both.
I want to thank everyone who has contributed – from whatever point of view – to a difficult but productive discussion. A few final thoughts. We are not discussing whether the people on either side of this debate are evil but whether the consequences of their actions are dangerous. I have no doubt that clinicians with a wealth of experience believe themselves to be doing good. Nor do I doubt that clients are overwhelmingly grateful. But terrible consequences can be the work of well-intentioned people. The immediate psychological benefit to clients is clearly the result of validation by a figure of authority – often this is the first time they have been addressed in their preferred gender. This moment of validation, or understanding, is the aim of every psychological therapy – even therapies which do not lead to ‘drastic and irreversible’ treatment. Clients within the current GIC therapy protocol receive medication of which they already hold high expectations (as we can see from social media): the placebo effect may well be a factor in their immediate psychological improvement. This improvement does not in and of itself prove the diagnosis to be correct. Indeed the fact that a clinician comes to a different diagnosis with access to family history and context than without must suggest that a diagnosis based solely on the client’s testimony is unsafe. And finally, we need to remember that private medicine, like any business, develops its own commercial momentum, needing to grow to remain profitable. Business imperatives are always in danger of compromising medical integrity in these circumstances.
Pingback: Monday, 1/23/17 | Tipsy Teetotaler
I had kind of a startling realization while grocery shopping tonight – transgenderism is supposedly a rare condition, right? A really really rare condition, like 0.3% of the population (Does this count only people who have ordinary genitals or does this include people with actual genital defects that are under the misleading umbrella term “intersex”?
I have had a couple of rare health problems in my life: I contracted Lyme disease a year before the infectious spirochete was named, I had a polyp in my colon not associated with cancer (a very rare form of colon polyp) and deformities of my esophagus that don’t even have a name (somewhat similar to Barrett’s esophagus, but Barrett’s caused the lower half of the esophagus to be more like a pouch than a tube. In mine the upper third is a pouch and the lower 2/3 is a rigid, narrow tube. I also had a toxic nodule on my thyroid at 27, which the doctors were certain was Graves due to my age and sex. My husband did library research and found I was a better match for toxic nodule, which tests proved it to be.
The reason I mention the details is this – I have experience of having a rare medical condition and the doctors telling me “when you hear hoofbeats, think horses, not zebras”. Even when I was a really lousy match for Graves – my swelling came on suddenly, on only one side of my neck, I had no anti-thyroid antibodies, no family history of any autoimmune disease – the doctors kept insisting it must be Graves. It took 7 endocrinologists til I found one who would do the right test for toxic nodule. With my esophagus, I spent my whole life telling doctors that my food would get stuck in my chest, to which I was told that this is a symptom of anxiety, and food really doesn’t get stuck at the spot where I felt it. When I finally convinced a gastroenterologist to order a test, in my 40s the tech guy who was performing it was so shocked at my weird esophagus, he ran and got friends to watch while I swallowed more barium.
Anyway, with the various weird health problems I have had, I have never run into a doctor, even specialists in area of my weird problem, who would believe it was even worth LOOKING FOR a weird problem. Thyroid nodules I had of the type I had occur in 4-7% of the population – more than 10x the frequency of transgender.
So why are the “gender” specialists, with barely a glance, identifying every patient who comes through the door as ANOTHER ZEBRA?
Precisely. As my GP said to me in relation to diagnosis of gender dysphoria: ‘It’s the problem with specialist services. If I send someone to the irritable bowel clinic with a huge skin cancer on their face, they will still diagnose irritable bowel cancer.’ Specialist clinics are used to diagnosing their own specialism. The more they diagnose it, the more they believe it is everywhere and the more they claim to be experts in their specialism. That’s why Lorimer’s pride in his 4000+ cases needs to be taken with a massive (health threatening) pinch of salt. Because it does not prove that those diagnoses were correct.
After I wrote the above, it occurred to me that the only clinics I can think of where *everybody* who walks thru the door gets the same diagnosis – often before any investigation is done – are quack clinics, the kind of places where they have a secret juicing formula that cures everything.
Even the specialists I’ve encountered, while they might, as SunMom describes, connect whatever the patient’s complaint to whatever the doctor’s specialty is, it was a rare doctor who was even willing to entertain the one of the *rarer* of the options. The endocrinologists absolutely believed just by looking at the lump on my neck that it was a thyroid problem. They just were certain it was the far more common problem of Graves, and were unwilling to entertain the idea that I had the much more rare Toxic Nodule – and as I said, Toxic nodule is at least 10x more common than trans &/or intersex.
The gastroenterologists, weirdly enough, mostly thought I had anxiety (even though it was during one of the least anxiety-producing times of my life), their next guess was gastric reflux. I never even heard of Barrett’s esophagus until after the barium test, because it was the closest thing to my weird esophagus.
So, basically, even with the tendency to connect whatever complaint to whatever the doctor’s specialty is, there is still the issue of doctors “thinking horses not zebras”, being sure that the problem has to be the more common diagnosis, not the rarer one.
My Peak Trans moment was when I started reading trans material as a would-be “ally” trying to make sense of a close friend’s adult-onset transition. I had assumed that articles by responsible activists and writers would answer my nagging questions and assuage my skepticism, but instead I found only material that confirmed my worst suspicions (that my friend, a troubled and highly cerebral person, was caught in a self-reinforcing cycle of motivated cognition.)
The straw that broke the camel’s back for me was a widely recommended article titled “That Was Dysphoria?” by a well-known twentysomething MTF activist and Youtube personality. It was articulate and well-written, but its contents boiled down to “Are you depressed, anxious or unhappy? All of these things are symptoms of dysphoria. The only way to know for sure is to transition and see if it cures them. It worked for me.” (It didn’t; the author later wrote a followup article stating that their symptoms had returned after their transition, and that they had eventually been diagnosed with depression, but that of course this didn’t invalidate the reality of their trans identity. If the possibility that the initial “cure” had been a placebo ever occurred to them, they didn’t mention it.)
This was an activist, of course, not a clinician — but these are the people whose advocacy influences the standards of care.
This is an excellent point.
4thwavenow, I think this is a comment which might benefit from being elevated in a post, where more people could think about it.
Thanks, katiesan.
I’m honored.
Pingback: The Violence of Love – THE BLOG OF DAVID ROBERTSON
Or as the gender specialists like to say ‘another platypus’
Agreed, and with medical problems such as the esophagus deformities and colon polyp Trish describes above, those both were material, physical problem which could be seen and proven to exist thanks to various diagnostic equipment. With transgender, diagnosis is based only upon claims of the patient’s emotions and feelings. There is no form of physical proof to confirm or deny a diagnosis of transgender, which makes it conveniently and extremely easy for transgender specialists to stamp every case that comes through the door with a positive diagnosis.
A couple of things. One is that the trans activists like to claim that the existence of “intersex” deformities justify their claims of being born with a brain/body gender mismatch. Do any of these clinics even bother ruling in/out actual sex chromosome deformities? What about birth defects that are not genetic, but result from what is called “an insult to the fetus” (for example smoking, which can cause a low birth rate), do these clinics check for these sorts of things?
Just the fact that these clinics wouldn’t check for physical abnormalities first shows that the whole “but intersex” justification is just the trans activists using the existence of people who have severe abnormalities (most people with deformities to the sex chromosomes have defects all over their bodies, often including their brains) for political justification.
Pingback: #GenderCare - Dr Lorimer brings all the 'transboys' to the yard - Lily MaynardLily Maynard
Pingback: #GenderCare - Dr Lorimer brings all the 'transboys' to the yard -Lily Maynard