#WPATH files
Explore tagged Tumblr posts
vaspider · 1 year ago
Text
You'll probably see these "WPATH Files" trotted out a lot in the coming months. It's important to know what's actually in them and be armed with facts. Fortunately, Erin Reed has gone over them.
601 notes · View notes
Text
Tumblr media Tumblr media
By: Gerald Posner
Published: Mar 4, 2024
Newly leaked files from the world’s leading transgender health-care organization reveal it is pushing hormonal and surgical transitions for minors, including stomach-wrenching experimental procedures designed to create sexless bodies that resemble department-store mannequins.
The World Professional Association for Transgender Health documents demonstrate it’s controlled by gender ideologues who push aside concerns about whether children and adolescents can consent to medical treatments that WPATH members privately acknowledge often have devastating and permanent side effects.
Yet the US government, American doctors and prominent organizations nonetheless rely on WPATH guidelines for advice on treating our youth.
The files — jaw-dropping conversations from a WPATH internal messaging board and a video of an Identity Evolution Workshop panel — were provided to journalist Michael Shellenberger, who shared the documents with me.
Shellenberger’s nonprofit Environmental Progress will release a scathing summary report, comparing the WPATH promotion of “the pseudoscientific surgical destruction of healthy genitals in vulnerable people” to the mid-20th-century use of lobotomies, “the pseudoscientific surgical destruction of healthy brains.”
‘Arbitrary’ age limits
The comparison to one of history’s greatest medical scandals is not hyperbole.
It is particularly true, as the files show repeatedly, when it involves WPATH’s radical approach to minors.
When the organization adopted in 2022 its current Standards of Care — relied on by the National Institutes of Health, the World Health Organization and every major American medical and psychiatric association — it scrapped a draft chapter about ethics and removed minimum-age requirements for children starting puberty blockers or undergoing sexual-modification surgeries.
It had previously recommended 16 to start hormones and 17 for surgery.
Not surprisingly, age comes up frequently in the WPATH files, from concerns about whether a developmentally delayed 13-year-old can start on puberty blockers to whether the growth of a 10-year-old girl will be stunted by hormones.
During one conversation, a member asked for advice about a 14-year-old patient, a boy who identified as a girl and had begun transitioning at 4.
The child insisted on a vaginoplasty, a surgery that removes the penis, testicles and scrotum and repositions tissue to create a nonfunctioning pseudo-vagina. It requires a lifetime of dilation. Was he too young at 14?
Marci Bowers, WPATH’s president and a California-based pelvic and gynecologic surgeon who is herself transgender, said she considered any age limit “arbitrary.”
But she would not do it. Why?
“The tissue is too immature, dilation routine too critical.”
In lay terms, that means boys who are too young do not have enough penal tissue for the surgery and the surgeon must harvest intestinal lining to build the faux vagina. Even Bowers admits that can lead to “problematic surgical outcomes.”
She would know since she has performed more than 2,000 vaginoplasties. Her highest-profile patient is 17-year-old Jazz Jennings, the transgender star of reality TV show “I Am Jazz.”
Three corrective surgeries were required to fix problems from the original vaginoplasty.
“She had a very difficult surgical course,” Bowers admitted in a 2022 appearance on the show. “We knew it would be tough — it turned out tougher than any of us imagined.”
Still, Bowers told her colleagues in the internal discussion forum of the best age for an adolescent to undergo surgery: “sometime before the end of high school does make some sense in that they are under the watch of parents in the home they grew up in.”
Christine McGinn, a Pennsylvania plastic surgeon and herself transgender, agreed. McGinn has performed “about 20 vaginoplasties in patients under 18” and thinks the “ideal time in the U.S. is surgery the summer before the last year of high school. I have heard many other surgeons echo this.”
Waiting until teens are older than 18 and in college is problematic, she said: “there are too many stressors in college that limit patients’ ability to dilate.”
Dangers downplayed
WPATH assures patients that surgical and hormonal interventions are tested and safe. It is a different matter in private.
President Bowers, for instance, said publicly in 2022 that puberty blockers are “completely reversible,” although in the internal forum she conceded it is “in its infancy.”
What about children who are infertile for life since they started hormone blockers before they reached puberty?
Bowers told her colleagues the “fertility question has no research.”
At other stages, members talk frankly about the complications for the transition surgery for girls, a phalloplasty in which a nonfunctioning pseudo-penis is fashioned from either forearm or thigh tissue.
It requires a full hysterectomy and surgical removal of the vagina. They also discuss other serious consequences, including pelvic inflammatory disease, vaginal atrophy, abnormal pap tests and incontinence.
A 16-year-old girl who had been on puberty blockers for several years before she was put on testosterone for a year had developed two liver tumors that an oncologist concluded the hormones had caused. Another member described “a young patient on testosterone for 3 years” who had developed “vaginal/pelvic pain/spotting . . . [and] atrophy with the persistent yellow discharge.”
Several colleagues described patients with similar conditions, some with debilitating bowel problems or bleeding and excruciating pain during sex (“feeling like broken glass”).
Vaginal estrogen creams and moisturizers as well as hyaluronic acid suppositories “can be helpful.”
One WPATH member seemed surprised: “The transgender people under my surveillance do not complain about this matter. However, I confess that I have never asked them about it.”
Rise of ‘de-gender’ surgery
The litany of transition surgery’s side effects did not stop WPATH from endorsing far more radical “nullification” surgeries for patients who do not feel either male or female and identify only as nonbinary.
Several dozen so-called “de-gendering” surgeries are designed to create a sexless, smooth cosmetic appearance that is unknown in nature. There is even an experimental “bi-genital” surgery that attempts to construct a second set of genitals.
In 2017, when tabloids reported a 22-year-old man had spent $50,000 to surgically remove his sex organs so he could “transform into a genderless extra-terrestrial,” it seemed a one-off oddity.
But WPATH has enshrined that concept in its Standard of Care — the same document in which the group endorsed for the time first time chemical or surgical castration for patients who identify as eunuchs. (WPATH even linked to the Eunuch Archives, where men anonymously share castration fetishes.)
These science-fiction-like surgeries are not only reserved for adults.
“How do we come up with appropriate standards for non-binary patients?” asked Thomas Satterwhite, a San Francisco-based plastic surgeon who has operated on dozens of patients younger than 18 since 2014. “I’ve found more and more patients recently requesting ‘non-standard’ procedures.”
What are nonstandard procedures? They include “non-binary top surgery,” a mastectomy without nipples. There are brutal procedures for girls that eliminate all or part of the vagina and for boys that amputate the penis, scrotum and testicles.
The goal, as one San Francisco surgical clinic proclaims on its website, “is a smooth, neutral body that is cosmetically free of sexual identification.” On TikTok the trend is called a “flat front.”
‘Too young to understand‘
A particularly intense subject of discussion was whether minors could understand the lifelong consequences of their gender treatments. Minors are presumed by law to be incapable of making an informed decision about having a vasectomy or tubal ligation.
Gender surgeries are an exception, however.
WPATH’s Standard of Care allows all procedures so long as the minor “demonstrates the emotional and cognitive maturity required to provide informed consent/assent for the treatment.”
In a May 2022 internal workshop, “Identity Evolution,” WPATH members conceded that was all but impossible.
Daniel Metzger, the British Columbia endocrinologist who cowrote the Canadian Pediatric Society’s position paper on health care for trans minors, said, “I think the thing you have to remember about kids is that we’re often explaining these sorts of things to people who haven’t even had biology in high school yet.”
Metzger noted adolescents are incapable of appreciating the lifelong consequence of infertility. “It’s always a good theory that you talk about fertility preservation with a 14-year-old,” he said, “but I know I’m talking to a blank wall. They’d be like, ‘ew, kids, babies, gross.’ Or, the usual answer is, ‘I’m just going to adopt.’ And then you ask them, ‘Well, what does that involve? Like, how much does it cost?’ ‘Oh, I thought you just like went to the orphanage, and they gave you a baby.’ . . . I think now that I follow a lot of kids into their mid-twenties, I’m always like, ‘Oh, the dog isn’t doing it for you, right?’”
There is extensive research showing adolescent brains are wired to have little control over rash behavior and are not capable of grasping the magnitude of decisions with lifelong consequences. It is why society doesn’t allow teens to get tattoos or buy guns. Car-rental agencies set 25 as the minimum age for renting a car, and Sweden sets the same limit for deciding on sterilization.
Detransitioners ignored, shunned
Although many WPATH members privately doubt that adolescents can give truly informed consent to life-altering procedures, they must affirm whatever children say about their gender.
Unless, the WPATH files disclose, the patient wants to reverse course and become a so-called detransitioner.
WPATH members mostly dismiss those cases as insignificant or overblown by the media and question whether minors who want to revert to their birth sex really understand what they are doing.
It’s a question that would never be asked for minors who declared themselves to be gender dysphoric.
One case involved a 17-year-old boy, just graduated from high school, who had been on testosterone for two years. He was reported to be “very distraught and angry. He reports he feels he was brainwashed and is upset by the permanent changes to his body.”
A self-described “queer therapist” did not believe any young person could be brainwashed. “In my experience, those stories come from people who have an active agenda against the rights of trans people.”
WPATH President Bowers said that “I do see talk of the phenomenon [detransitioners] as distracting from the many challenges we face.”
‘Frankenstein files’
The leaked files put a spotlight on the danger of mixing ideological activism with medicine and science. They should serve as an urgent wakeup call for the medical associations and government agencies that rely on WPATH guidance for transgender health.
The files might even prompt investigations into how those with distorted personal agendas seized control of the organization at the expense of science and patients.
Investigating what has gone wrong at WPATH might prove uncomfortable for some gender progressives in the Biden administration, none more so than Adm. Rachel Levine, the assistant secretary for health. Levine, the first transgender four-star military officer, is a WPATH member and has lavished praise on the organization.
She says it “assesses the full state of the science and provides substantive, rigorously analyzed, peer-reviewed recommendations to the medical community on how best to care for patients who are transgender or gender non-binary. It is free of any agenda other than to ensure that medical decisions are informed by science.”
Either Levine is unaware of the hormonal and surgical experimentation the group promotes or refuses to acknowledge it.
“The Frankenstein files.”
That is how a pediatrician described the leaked documents after I shared them with her.
Unfortunately, this is no horror novel.
It is a medical travesty playing out in real time, and the casualties are our children.
32 notes · View notes
justinspoliticalcorner · 1 year ago
Text
Erin In The Morning:
On Friday, numerous conservative accounts and news sources promoted headlines that the "American College of Pediatricians" had issued a statement against transgender care. A video accompanied the announcement featuring Dr. Jill Simons, who, wearing a white lab coat, states that there must be an end to "social affirmation, puberty blockers, and cross-sex hormones" for transgender youth. Despite the official-looking attire and name, the organization's name serves to mislead observers into thinking they are the much larger American Academy of Pediatrics, which represents tens of thousands of pediatricians. In reality, the ACP is a hyper-conservative Christian group of doctors created in 2002 to oppose gay parenting. In the announcement released on Friday, Simons called for an end to social transition and gender-affirming care for transgender youth. One video, which went viral, begins with a statement that the organization has released a "declaration" authored by the American College of Pediatricians, along with "hundreds of doctors and healthcare workers," opposing transgender care. It references the highly-politicized Cass Review from the United Kingdom, whose author controversially blames pornography for being transgender, as well as the Climategate-style leak of the “WPATH Files” to support the statement.
The video, which was viewed over 51 million times on Twitter, cuts off just before the next speaker is introduced: Dr. Andre Van Mol, who represents the Christian Medical and Dental Associations. Van Mol serves on the board of the Bethel Church of Redding, which made headlines in 2019 for attempting to pray a dead child back to life. He is followed by representatives from several other Christian medical organizations that also support banning transgender care. The website promoted at the event lists signatories to the statement, including the Catholic Medical Association, Genspect, The National Catholic Bioethics Center, the Family Research Council, and the Discovery Institute, an organization that promotes intelligent design over evolution in schools.
The American College of Pediatricians has been hugely influential in the promotion of anti-trans policy in the United States, relying in part to its misleading name. Members of the organization testify in state houses and courtrooms across the United States, misleading legislators into thinking they are the much larger American Academy of Pediatrics, the professional society that represents 67,000 pediatricians in the United States. In 2023, the organization inadvertently left a Google Drive public, leading to the leak of a massive trove of files showing their extremist roots. According to these documents, the group received significant donations from the Alliance Defending Freedom, a right-wing organization that has played a large role in the passage and defense of anti-LGBTQ+ laws in the United States. It also received free video production from Family Watch International, a group of Christian fundamentalists opposing homosexuality, birth control, abortion, and sex education. The American College of Pediatricians itself has been listed as a hate group by the Southern Poverty Law Center since 2012, when the group’s leader stated that “homosexuality poses a danger to children” and that the group was “essentially a Judeo-Christian values organization.”
[...] Despite the widespread misinformation, every major medical organization in the United States supports gender-affirming care. In February, the American Psychological Association, the largest psychological association in the world, released a policy resolution stating that gender-affirming care is medically necessary and saves lives. The American Academy of Pediatrics currently recommends that transgender youth have access to gender-affirming care tailored to their unique needs. The Advocates for Trans Equality maintains a list of over 30 of the largest U.S.-based medical organizations that support transgender care, including the Endocrine Society, the Pediatric Endocrine Society, the American Public Health Association, and the American Medical Association.
Anti-trans extremists such as X owner Elon Musk and numerous right-wing and anti-trans pundits and websites are touting a video from American College of Pediatricians (ACPeds) Dr. Jill Simons issuing a statement opposing gender-affirming care for trans children.
In contrast to radical right-wing whacko group ACPeds, mainstream medical organizations support gender-affirming care as a medically necessary.
ACPeds is a radical right-wing medical group that is opposed to abortion, LGBTQ+ rights, and transgender rights, and has trafficked in COVID denialism and anti-vaxxer extremism.
15 notes · View notes
aridara · 1 year ago
Text
So you know about the "WPATH Files", that collection of screenshotted posts taken from the WPATH forum, which supposedly expose how WPATH doctors are evil and out to get your children? You'd be surprised about how the claims anti-trans activists make about those posts are not supported by the posts themselves. Don't believe me? Then let's look at the NY Post article about the document. Specifically, let's look at what the article claims versus the actual reality of what is shown in those posts.
TL;dr:
WPATH doesn't authorize medical transition procedures for immature patient. They actually verify that the patient is mature enough, before allowing the procedure. They also need parental consent.
WPATH doesn't ignore the risks of gender-affirming care. They explain them to both patient and parents, in detail. And if issues do show up, they try to fix them instead of sweeping them under the rug.
WPATH isn't trying to "desex (sterilize) children". That's just the same, old, tired "they're coming for your children!" narrative used against Jewish people, gay people etc etc.
WPATH doesn't disbelieve detransitioners, they support them.
CLAIM: Not surprisingly, age comes up frequently in the WPATH files, from concerns about whether a developmentally delayed 13-year-old can start on puberty blockers to whether the growth of a 10-year-old girl will be stunted by hormones. (The article implies that WPATH doctors are pushing medical procedures on patients who are too young to understand them)
REALITY: The first case (section 21-A "ETHICAL GUIDELINES TO ADOLESCENT CARE - WPATH members discuss the Standards of Care (SOC) ethics for treating adevelopmentally delayed, 13-year-old") is about a 13yo who is already on puberty blockers. Specifically, patients who want hormone therapy need to reach enough emotional/cognitive maturity to provide informed consent to the treatment; but the specific patient in question will reach that maturity either way later than normal, or never at all. The poster asks what to do. Other users suggest a psychiatric evaluation to check whether the patient is capable of consenting or not, weighing the risks of continuing the blockers with the risks of stopping them, etc.
There is no evidence that the doctors gave hormones to that 13yo. Keep in mind that the NYP was complaining about the possibility of that 13yo getting hormones. The NYP had no complaint about the usage of puberty blockers, since the patient was effectively mature enough to get those, and the parents and doctors gave authorization.
Also, one of the posters point out that this kind of discussion also happens with cis (aka non-trans) kids with mental development issues who need access to surgeries. The normal approach is for the doctor, the parents and the patient to discuss together to reach a consensus: in order to approve the medical procedure, the doctor must believe that the procedure will be medically beneficial, the parents must provide full informed consent, and the patient must provide as much consent as possible. There are limit cases where one side can be overridden, like when a patient will never reach a sufficient level of mental maturity, and the doctor and parents are forced to evaluate the risk/benefits of each option. My point is that the NYP has no problems when this approach is applied to cis kids; it complains only when trans kids might get access to medical procedures.
The second case (section 5-A "PUBERTY SUPPRESSION TACTICS - A WPATH member questions the effects of puberty blockers on total height achievement for a 10-year-old patient") is about a patient who asked questions about puberty blockers. The 10yo patient in question was NOT on puberty blockers, nor he was given any - unlike what the NYP tries to imply.
CLAIM: During one conversation, a member asked for advice about a 14-year-old patient, a boy who identified as a girl and had begun transitioning at 4. The child insisted on a vaginoplasty...
REALITY: This is false. The original poster (section 1-A "GENDER AFFIRMING SURGERY FOR MINORS - WPATH members discuss transition surgery for a 14-year-old") only talks about "Gender Affirming Surgery MtF". Christine N. McGinn talks about vaginoplasties she performed on minors, noting that they didn't have any more issues than adult patients: most of them went fantastic, a few of them got issue (mostly because they didn't follow the dilation schedule), and none of them regretted the surgery.
It should also be mentioned that multiple users agreed that 14 was too young. Which shoots a hole in the NYP's "WPATH tried to push vaginoplasty on a 14yo kid" narrative. Whoops.
CLAIM: President Bowers, for instance, said publicly in 2022 that puberty blockers are “completely reversible,” although in the internal forum she conceded it is “in its infancy.”
REALITY: The two quotes don't contradict each other. In the first quote, Bowers claims that blockers AS THEY ARE USED IN GENDER-AFFIRMING CARE (aka for maximum 1 year) are reversible - meaning that if you stop taking them, the effects should reverse themselves. But the second quote (in section 5-B "PUBERTY SUPPRESSION TACTICS - WPATH members discuss how puberty blockers preclude fertility options for trans patients") talks about what happens when puberty is blocked indefinitely. Two very different things.
CLAIM: What about children who are infertile for life since they started hormone blockers before they reached puberty? Bowers told her colleagues the “fertility question has no research.”
REALITY: The Bowers quote doesn't exist in any of the screenshotted posts. The NYP made that up.
CLAIM: At other stages, members talk frankly about the complications for the transition surgery for girls, a phalloplasty in which a nonfunctioning pseudo-penis is fashioned from either forearm or thigh tissue. It requires a full hysterectomy and surgical removal of the vagina. They also discuss other serious consequences, including pelvic inflammatory disease, vaginal atrophy, abnormal pap tests and incontinence.
REALITY: I can't find the screenshotted posts in question. But let's assume for a second that the NYP is telling the truth here; it doesn't actually explain why "WPATH doctors discuss the complications for transition surgery" is bad. As usual, anti-trans activists only focus on the negative effects and risks of any form of medical transition, while completely ignoring any possible positive effect - like, say, alleviating the patient's gender dysphoria.
As far as I can tell, the NYP is trying to imply that these doctors hide these risks from their patients. Which... isn't true. Like, at all. In fact, the fact that they talk about the negative effects so much on a web forum that anyone can access just by paying a fee should clue the reader that these doctors are NOT trying to hide these effects/risks from their patients.
CLAIM: A 16-year-old girl who had been on puberty blockers for several years before she was put on testosterone for a year had developed two liver tumors that an oncologist concluded the hormones had caused.
REALITY: Looking at the posts (section 3-B "SURGICAL OR HEALTHCARE COMPLICATIONS - A WPATH member discusses the development of hepatic adenomas on a client taking testosterone/estrogen"), it turns out that the patient was using both testosterone and oral contraceptives. Hepatic adenomas, also called hepatocellular adenomas, are rare but benign epithelial tumors of the liver frequently associated with oral contraceptive pill use. Meanwhile, there is no evidence that transmasculine people who use hormones are at risk of liver cancer. (Sources: 1, 2.)
CLAIM: Another member described “a young patient on testosterone for 3 years” who had developed “vaginal/pelvic pain/spotting . . . [and] atrophy with the persistent yellow discharge.” Several colleagues described patients with similar conditions, some with debilitating bowel problems or bleeding and excruciating pain during sex (“feeling like broken glass”). Vaginal estrogen creams and moisturizers as well as hyaluronic acid suppositories “can be helpful.” One WPATH member seemed surprised: “The transgender people under my surveillance do not complain about this matter. However, I confess that I have never asked them about it.”
REALITY: This part of the NYP article repeatedly jumps between section 3-C "SURGICAL OR HEALTHCARE COMPLICATIONS - A WPATH member reports their young patient is experiencing vaginal pain on testosterone"; and section 3-D "SURGICAL OR HEALTHCARE COMPLICATIONS - WPATH members discuss erection pain in a patient on estrogen". So there's some confusion here. The general gist of both discussions is: the original poster brings up an issue that their patient has, other users discuss similar cases, provide additional information, and offer possible solutions.
Again: this is a case where a patient got some negative side effects from the treatment, and doctors are trying to solve them. Cases like these happen all the time. There is no evidence that the patient wasn't properly informed before being allowed to get the treatment. The doctors are trying to fix the problem. So what, exactly, is the NYP complaining about? Because if ONE single case of negative effects is enough to condemn a medical treatment, then the NYP should condemn every single medical treatment ever. But no, instead they only focus the blame on treatments that are primarily used by trans people. I wonder why [#sarcasm].
CLAIM: “How do we come up with appropriate standards for non-binary patients?” asked Thomas Satterwhite, a San Francisco-based plastic surgeon who has operated on dozens of patients younger than 18 since 2014. “I’ve found more and more patients recently requesting ‘non-standard’ procedures.” What are nonstandard procedures? They include “non-binary top surgery,” a mastectomy without nipples. There are brutal procedures for girls that eliminate all or part of the vagina and for boys that amputate the penis, scrotum and testicles.
REALITY: Satterwhite did, in fact, ask information about standards for non-binary patients (section 12-A "NON-STANDARD MEDICAL PROCEDURES - WPATH members discuss appropriate standards of care for nonbinary patients, particularly when they request non-standard procedures"). However, you can notice a thing. The NYP made sure to explicitly talk about "de-gendering" surgeries in the most scary and shocking way possible; then they mentioned that Satterwhite operated on dozens of patients younger than 18; then mentioned his quote about non-standard surgeries; and then proceeded to once again describe said surgeries in scary terms, saying that they're performed on "girls" and "boys". So you would think that Satterwhite is performing these horrible surgeries on children, right?
Well, turns out that in the screenshotted posts, Satterwhite made absolutely no mention of underage patients. His question was about non-binary patients in general.
Also, fun fact that the NYP doesn't mention: in trans healthcare, practically all genital surgeries are performed on adult patients. The very few exceptions are performed on 17yo patients, but ONLY in cases where waiting until the patient becomes 18 would make the surgery significantly harder to perform, to the point of having an increased risk of killing the patient. And even then, you need a metric ton of medical requirements.
CLAIM: A particularly intense subject of discussion was whether minors could understand the lifelong consequences of their gender treatments. Minors are presumed by law to be incapable of making an informed decision about having a vasectomy or tubal ligation. Gender surgeries are an exception, however. WPATH’s Standard of Care allows all procedures so long as the minor “demonstrates the emotional and cognitive maturity required to provide informed consent/assent for the treatment.”
REALITY: The NYP is lying. For starters, it forgets to mention that, in various states, minors CAN get certain surgical procedures as long as they pass certain prerequisites, such as a minimum age (like 16). Why? Because it's acknowledged that children mature over time, and become more and more capable of understanding - and by extension consenting to - more complex things, like surgeries.
Another thing that the NYP omits is that minors can get invasive medical treatments even if they don't reach the minimum consent age, as long as the doctor can provide reasonable medical reason to do so; the parents provide fully informed consent to the procedure; and the underage patient provides a sufficient amount of consent, which varies depending on the procedure requested. The latter is what “demonstrates the emotional and cognitive maturity required to provide informed consent/assent for the treatment” refers to.
The main difference is that WPATH doesn't decide that patients above a certain age are automatically mature enough to consent to a specific procedure; instead, WPATH doctors actually verify whether or not the patient is mature enough to consent to that specific procedure.
CLAIM: In a May 2022 internal workshop, “Identity Evolution,” WPATH members conceded that was all but impossible. Daniel Metzger, the British Columbia endocrinologist who cowrote the Canadian Pediatric Society’s position paper on health care for trans minors, said, “I think the thing you have to remember about kids is that we’re often explaining these sorts of things to people who haven’t even had biology in high school yet.”
The quote is from the transcript of the "Identity Evolution Workshop", Clip 1. It also completely fails to prove the NYP's point. Remember: the NYP is trying to claim that children cannot, under any circumstance, consent to surgeries - implying that this means that they shouldn't have access to surgeries. This is false.
Also, the transcript shows Metzger saying that they should improve the way doctors explain medical procedures to patients and parents, because if they don't understand these procedures, they can't provide informed consent, and therefore they can't have access to said procedures. Metzger is NOT proposing to provide medical procedures to people who don't provide informed consent.
CLAIM: Although many WPATH members privately doubt that adolescents can give truly informed consent to life-altering procedures, they must affirm whatever children say about their gender.Unless, the WPATH files disclose, the patient wants to reverse course and become a so-called detransitioner.WPATH members mostly dismiss those cases as insignificant or overblown by the media and question whether minors who want to revert to their birth sex really understand what they are doing.It’s a question that would never be asked for minors who declared themselves to be gender dysphoric. One case involved a 17-year-old boy, just graduated from high school, who had been on testosterone for two years. He was reported to be “very distraught and angry. He reports he feels he was brainwashed and is upset by the permanent changes to his body.”A self-described “queer therapist” did not believe any young person could be brainwashed. “In my experience, those stories come from people who have an active agenda against the rights of trans people.”
REALITY: The NYP is dishonestly mixing together multiple different contexts.
When a patient goes to a WPATH doctor and claims to be trans, the doctor accepts it. When a patient claims to not be trans anymore, the doctor still accepts it.
When a patient declares themselves to be gender dysphoric, the doctor DOES, in fact, verify whether the assertion is true, through psychological examination, exploring whether the dysphoria is innate or caused by issues like mistakenly believing that being feminine means that you must be a girl and therefore have "female" biology and so on. After that is verified, however, the doctor accepts that the patient is right.
When discussing how the media and public claim that there is an epidemic of detransitioners, THAT is when WPATH doctors will say that the issue is overblown. Because the reality is that the amount of detransitioners - and specifically people who got through medical transition and then detransitioned afterwards - is incredibly small, unlike what anti-trans activists would make you believe.
All of that can be clearly seen in the discussion in section 4-A "DETRANSITION CONCERNS - A WPATH member reports a patient who reports feeling “brainwashed” into transition".
SO, TO RECAP:
The NYP complains that the WPATH uses ‘arbitrary’ age limits, implying imply that WPATH is trying to pressure forcibly trans young kids before they were ready. The reality, however, is that WPATH is doing what every other medical field does when a patient is a minor: they approve the treatment only if the doctor reasonably believes that it will be overall beneficial, the parents give informed consent, and the patient itself gives consent as much as possible. Checking whether or not a kid is mentally mature enough to at least understand somewhat the procedure falls under the third point; checking the kid's physical maturity falls under the first point, because it impacts whether or not the therapy will be overall beneficial.
(BTW, the NYP says that, when making the new Standards of Care, WPATH "scrapped a draft chapter about ethics and removed minimum-age requirements for children starting puberty blockers or undergoing sexual-modification surgeries." What the NYP doesn't say is that the guidelines ARE the ethics of the practice; and that WPATH replaced minimum-age requirements with evidence-based requirements. For example: instead of assuming that all 16yo patients are automatically mature enough to get hormones, the new guidelines require doctors to actually verify whether the patient is mature enough (both physically and mentally) or not. Why this change? Because there were several cases where 16yo-or-older patients were allowed to get hormones when they weren't ready.)
The NYP claims that WPATH doctors downplayed the dangers of gender-affirming care. They did not. The post themselves demonstrate that they amply and truthfully discuss these dangers - and inform their patients about them. And when negative issues do show up, WPATH doctors try to fix them.
The NYP implies that WPATH doctors are trying to de-sex children. They did not. The posts only talk about performing non-standard procedures on non-binary patients - but they make absolutely no mention of minors.
The NYP claims that WPATH doctors are dismissing and disbelieving detransitioners. They did not. WPATH doctors support detransitioning patients, direct them towards support groups, research solutions for the physical issues caused by the regretted procedures, and so on and so forth. WPATH doctors also denounce the whole "there's an epidemic of people who go through medical transition and then later detransition and regret it, because it's way too easy for children to get brainwashed into being trans and to get medical transition" narrative as false because it IS false.
9 notes · View notes
thequietabsolute · 1 year ago
Text
Tumblr media
Putting this here for future reference 

3 notes · View notes
itsawritblr · 1 year ago
Text
Oh, look what dropped in the notes:
Tumblr media
OMFG, look at her bio:
Tumblr media
An "ovicaprid" is a person who identifies as a bovid, i.e. sheep.
Tumblr media
and
Tumblr media
J.K. Rowling has been proven right!
"The Cass Review is a damning indictment of what the NHS has been doing to children.
"Dr Hilary Cass has submitted her final report and recommendations to NHS England in her role as Chair of the Independent Review of gender identity services for children and young people.
"Hilary Cass’s report demolishes the entire basis for the current model of treating gender-distressed children. Its publication is a shameful day for NHS England, which for too long gave vulnerable children harmful treatments for which there was no evidence base. It’s now clear to all that this was quack medicine from the start. 
"Dr Cass delivers stinging criticisms of NHS gender clinics, both adult and child, and her description of the Gender Identity Development Service is absolutely damning. It is disgraceful that GIDS, alongside the adult clinics, did not cooperate with her attempt to survey its practice, or to carry out a high-quality, long-term follow-up study on the treatment of children as part of the review, which would have been a global first."
Tumblr media Tumblr media
You can read the entire review here. (pdf)
Tumblr media
"Glinner" is Graham Linehan, a writer, screenwriter, and comedian who's been fighting against transitioning minors for years, losing friends, his job, and his agent along the way. But he's kept on fighting.
Tumblr media
,
Tumblr media
;
Tumblr media
.
Tumblr media
.
Tumblr media
The tide has turned in the UK and in Europe. When will American media finally begin reporting on the closing of "gender clinics" and the bans on puberty blockers for children? I figure nothing will happen here in the U.S. until the lawsuits start flooding in. It's already begun. And with proof like the Cass Review and the WPATH files, it's going to be very, very difficult for clinics, doctors, and therapists to continue lying about how transitioning does no permanent and irreversible physical and psychological harm.
554 notes · View notes
t-news-pastille · 1 year ago
Text
Actu trans de mars 2024
On débute les infos françaises pour faire suite à une news du mois dernier. La Haute Autorité de Santé (la HAS) conteste la décision du Tribunal administratif de Montreuil qui lui demandait de divulguer les noms des membres de son groupe de travail sur les parcours de transition des personnes trans.
La HAS a saisi la Cour de cassation pour continuer sa pratique habituelle de protection de la confidentialité de ses experts et expertes, soulignant les risques de pressions et les implications pour leur vie privée.
Ce groupe, formé en avril 2023, comprend des professionnel·les de santé, des expert·es et des représentant·es d'associations, et vise à améliorer l'organisation des soins et la prise en charge médicale des personnes trans.
Un regroupement d'associations LGBTQ+, dont STOP homophobie et Acceptess-T, ainsi qu’11 personnes trans et non-binaires, ont saisi le Conseil d'État pour revendiquer le droit Ă  dĂ©finir librement leur identitĂ© de genre et demander l'annulation des circulaires de 2017 concernant les procĂ©dures de changement de prĂ©nom et de mention du sexe Ă  l'Ă©tat civil.
(Ces 2 circulaires ont Ă©tĂ© mises en place pour prĂ©ciser certains points de la loi du 18 novembre 2016 qui est relative au changement d’état-civil.)
Ces actions contestent notamment l'obligation implicite de cispassing, perçue comme une atteinte au droit au respect de la vie privée, et une discrimination basée sur l'apparence physique, excluant notamment les personnes non-binaires.
Le recours vise Ă  promouvoir l'autodĂ©termination du genre et Ă  mettre fin Ă  l'intervention de l'État dans la reconnaissance des identitĂ©s de genre.
J’en profite au passage, vu qu’on est sur la mĂȘme thĂ©matique, pour vous informer que l’association TOUTES DES FEMMES a sorti une pĂ©tition visant Ă  demander un changement de sexe Ă  l’état-civil libre, dĂ©judiciarisĂ© et gratuit.
Un rapport de 369 pages sur « la transidentification [sic] des mineurs » a Ă©tĂ© remis au SĂ©nat Ă  la fin du mois par un groupe de travail de sĂ©nateurs LR, dans le but d’en dĂ©gager des propositions de loi avant l’étĂ©.
Je ne vais pas trop m’étendre en dĂ©tail sur le rapport parce que j’ai dĂ©jĂ  fais plusieurs stories Instagram et que je prĂ©voie de dĂ©dier une vidĂ©o sur le sujet.
Mais pour contextualiser rapidement, Jacqueline Eustache Brinio est Ă  la tĂȘte de ce groupe LR. Elle a votĂ© contre l’interdiction des thĂ©rapies de conversion contre les personnes trans et les transitions pour les mineur·es trans en 2022. (Mais elle est favorable aux mutilations sur les enfants intersexes
)
Le groupe de travail est proche de personnalitĂ©s douteuses comme CĂ©line Masson et Caroline Eliacheff qui sont toutes deux Ă  la tĂȘte ou proches de mouvements sectaires comme L’observatoire de la petite sirĂšne et Ypomonie. (Qui d’ailleurs, pour ce premier, a partagĂ© sur son site le rapport avant que celui-ci ne soit rendu public par les LR. Ce qui rend assez clair le fait que les LR ont servis de pantins pour diffuser politiquement une idĂ©ologie transphobe.)
Il semble Ă©vident, au vu du nom du rapport et des gens interrogĂ©s, qu’il y a une volontĂ© explicite Ă  terme d’interdire les transitions des mineur·es ainsi que toute reconnaissance de l’identitĂ© de genre des mineur·es. Et d’emboĂźter le pas, ou de retranscrire « Ă  la française », ce qui peut se faire depuis quelques annĂ©es au Royaume-Uni et aux États-Unis. (En plus de propager de la dĂ©sinformation. Le lendemain, on a d’ailleurs eu le droit Ă  SĂ©golĂšne Royal qui nous sortait que la transidentitĂ© des gens venait du glyphosate
 VoilĂ , voilĂ .)
Qu’on s’entende bien, lĂ  ça commence par les mineur·es parce que ce sont les « cibles » les plus faciles Ă  atteindre sous couvert de protection des enfants. Mais aprĂšs ce sera pas avant 25 ans. Pour ensuite terminer sur une tentative d’interdiction complĂšte des transitions. Quand bien mĂȘme toutes les recommandations mondiales sĂ©rieuses recommandent ces transitions

Ce n’est pas la premiĂšre fois que ça arrive mais, Brigitte Macron, Ă©pouse d’Emmanuel Macron, a Ă©tĂ© de nouveau victime de rumeurs et thĂ©ories complotistes affirmant qu’elle serait une femme trans. Selon certain·es internautes, un vaste complot serait Ă  l'Ɠuvre pour masquer ce changement d'Ă©tat-civil et sa soit disant « vĂ©ritable identitĂ© ». LittĂ©ralement on a pu entendre ce genre de chose concernant Macron : « [Macron] qui n’a autre chose Ă  faire que de prĂ©tendre au dĂ©clenchement d'une troisiĂšme guerre mondiale pour cacher des rumeurs sur la transsexualitĂ© de sa femme »
Au lieu d’attaquer Macron sur son incompĂ©tence. J’veux dire, littĂ©ralement, on se trouve dans une kakistocratie depuis que le mec au pouvoir. Rien ne va. Tous nos acquis s’effondrent les uns aprĂšs les autres. Les français·es ont la tĂȘte sous l’eau. Mais non, les gens prĂ©fĂšrent gaspiller leur Ă©nergie sur un truc dont on se fout Ă©perdument.
C’est la premiĂšre fois que le prĂ©sident s’est exprimĂ© lĂ -dessus. On aurait pu avoir une sorte de Gaga Moment, Ă  dire qu’on s’en fiche complĂštement et que ce n’est pas une tare, ni une insulte d’ĂȘtre trans. Mais sans surprise, il a appelĂ© Ă  un renforcement de « l’ordre public numĂ©rique » sur les rĂ©seaux sociaux qu’il a qualifiĂ© de « lieu d’expression des plus fous ». Et a dĂ©noncĂ© de « fausses informations » et des « scĂ©narios fabriquĂ©s » concernant son Ă©pouse. En ajoutant que « le pire, [Ă©tait] que les gens finissent par y croire, et cela [...] Ă©nerve jusque dans [sa] vie privĂ©e ».
Une bonne nouvelle qui intĂ©ressera j’imagine pas mal de personnes transmasculines hormonĂ©es : l’arrivĂ©e sur le marchĂ© français d’un gĂ©nĂ©rique du NĂ©bido est prĂ©vue ! (Pour rappel, le NĂ©bido c’est un type de THS masculinisant qui se prends par injection toutes les 10 Ă  14 semaines environs.) TESTOSTERONE BESINS, c’est le nom du gĂ©nĂ©rique – il y a aussi le nom Androject qui se balade pour la France -, a reçu un avis favorable au remboursement de la HAS.
L’association ACCEPTESS-T a eu l’occasion de discuter avec le labo Besins qui le produit et confirme qu’un accord de prix labo / sĂ©cu a bien Ă©tĂ© passĂ©. (Au passage – parce qu’on m’a demandĂ© en message privĂ© si ça allait ĂȘtre un mĂ©doc safe - Besins c’est aussi le labo qui produit l’Androgel et l’Andractim. Et ils sont spĂ©cialisĂ©s dans les mĂ©doc’ gynĂ©co et andrologiques. Sachant qu’en plus, il y a des tests et rĂ©glementations avant qu’un produit arrive en France. Il y a pas vraiment de raison qu’on se retrouve avec un gĂ©nĂ©rique dangereux. ParenthĂšse refermĂ©e.)
Concernant le remboursement, on serait sur du 65%. Et en thĂ©orie comme pour les autres THS, c’est sensĂ© n’ĂȘtre valable que pour du AMM. (C’est Ă  dire que l’utilisation qu’aura le patient du traitement a Ă©tĂ© bien listĂ©e dans l’autorisation de mise sur le marchĂ© du mĂ©dicament.) Pour les personnes trans, on est, sur le papier en tout cas, sur du Hors AMM pour tous les THS. Donc c’est sensĂ© bloquer pour le remboursement. AprĂšs dans les faits, les mĂ©decins n’inscrivent pas (ou en tout cas trĂšs rarement) ce « Hors AMM » sur les ordonnances. Donc si ce n’est pas inscrit, le remboursement est sensĂ© se faire.
Au moment oĂč j’enregistre cet Ă©pisode, on ne sait pas encore exactement quand ce gĂ©nĂ©rique sera disponible. Selon Maud Royer qui a confirmĂ© l’info sur Twitter, il ne serait question que de quelques semaines (en tout cas la formulation de son tweet va dans ce sens). AprĂšs, des professionnel·les de santĂ© sont plutĂŽt d’avis que ça n’arriverait pas avant minimum plusieurs mois Ă  1 an ou plus. Mon endocrinologue et ma pharmacienne n’avaient pas d’infos lorsque je leur ai posĂ© des questions lĂ -dessus. Donc il va falloir se montrer patient avant d’avoir des infos plus officielles.
Pour faire suite Ă  une news du mois dernier concernant l’attaque au couteau d'une jeune fille trans lors d’une fĂȘte d’anniversaire Ă  Londres, 3 ado supplĂ©mentaires ont Ă©tĂ© inculpé·es et un procĂšs est prĂ©vu pour le 6 janvier 2025.
L’enquĂȘtrice principale sur cette affaire a indiquĂ© qu’« Ă  ce stade, [la police traite] cela comme un crime de haine transphobe ».
Il y a quelques semaines, JK Rowling a postĂ© un tweet transphobe visant India Willoughby, une journaliste trans britannique. Suite Ă  cette controverse, Willoughby a rencontrĂ© la police pour discuter de cette situation, oĂč elle Ă©tait qualifiĂ©e d’« homme » se dĂ©guisant en femme.
Bien que la police ait compris la situation et reconnu le caractÚre haineux du tweet, les lois actuelles au Royaume-Uni ne permettent pas de le qualifier comme un crime de haine, nécessitant plusieurs critÚres spécifiques.
Cependant, le tweet de Rowling a été enregistré par la police britannique en tant qu'« incident de haine non criminel », permettant ainsi de documenter cette manifestation de haine, de signaler les tendances discriminatoires et d'inscrire officiellement la transphobie de Rowling dans le registre public. Une premiÚre il me semble, malgré ses antécédents de comportements transphobes.
Toujours concernant JK Rowling, dĂ©cidĂ©ment la nĂ©nette passe ses journĂ©es Ă  ĂȘtre obsĂ©dĂ©e sur les personnes trans
., cette derniĂšre nous a pondu un tweet nĂ©gationniste concernant l'Holocauste, affirmant que les personnes trans n’étaient pas ciblĂ©es par les nazi·es.
Ce qui bien évidemment est faux hein.
Je ne vais pas m’étendre sur le sujet parce que ça mĂ©riterait une vidĂ©o dĂ©diĂ©e, mais l'Institut des sciences sexuelles de Magnus Hirschfeld (qui est considĂ©rĂ© un peu comme un pionnier dans la recherche pour les transitions et l’accompagnement des personnes trans) a Ă©tĂ© attaquĂ© et ravagĂ© en mai 1933. Les livres qui composaient la bibliothĂšque de cet institut, estimĂ©s de 10 000 Ă  20 000 ouvrages tout de mĂȘme (qui portaient notamment sur les soins de santĂ© queer, l’homosexualitĂ©, l’intersexuation et la transidentitĂ©, y compris sur des recherches scientifiques liĂ©es aux procĂ©dures de transition) ont Ă©tĂ© utilisĂ©s dans le cadre des premiĂšres autodafĂ©s nazis. Il Ă©tait question de censure de l’esprit contraire aux valeurs, aux traditions ou Ă  l'identitĂ© allemande.
Il convient Ă©galement de souligner que Dora Richter, la premiĂšre femme trans au monde Ă  bĂ©nĂ©ficier d’une opĂ©ration de rĂ©assignation sexuelle, a probablement Ă©tĂ© assassinĂ©e lors de ce raid ou peu de temps aprĂšs.
Donc voilĂ , Ă  un moment donnĂ© tu ne peux pas refaire l’Histoire juste parce que t’es transphobe. Ce n’est pas possible !
La derniĂšre personne qui s’y est tentĂ©e s’était d’ailleurs retrouvĂ©e au tribunal Ă  Cologne et avait perdu.
J’en avais dĂ©jĂ  parlĂ© il y a quelques mois, c’est officiellement pĂ©renne, le NHS d’Angleterre ne prescrira plus de bloqueurs de pubertĂ© aux mineur·es trans. Pour y avoir accĂšs il faudra faire parti·e d’un essai clinique ou bien se diriger vers des mĂ©decins privĂ©s.
Le Conseil National suisse a rejeté la proposition d'interdire les thérapies de conversion au niveau national. (Thérapies de conversion qui, je le rappelle, sont des tortures visant à rendre les personnes LGBTQ+ cis et hétéro).
Cette décision ne remet pas en cause l'interdiction de telles pratiques émise par le canton de Neuchùtel au printemps 2023. Les interdictions sont bien maintenues à l'échelle locale.
Le parti au pouvoir en Géorgie a proposé un projet de loi visant à lutter contre une « propagande LGBTQ+ » et qui restreindrait sévÚrement les droits des personnes queers. Ce texte comporte une longue liste de mesures homophobes et transphobes, comprenant notamment une interdiction de changement de la mention du sexe.
Environ 200 personnes ont attaqué un couple de personnes trans dans le centre de Thessalonique, en GrÚce.
Les victimes, ĂągĂ©es de 21 ans, ont Ă©tĂ© harcelĂ©es verbalement puis agressĂ©es physiquement avec des bouteilles et d'autres objets. Elles ont trouvĂ© refuge dans un restaurant voisin, oĂč le harcĂšlement a continuĂ©.
Cette attaque choquante a déclenché une vague d'indignation, avec des milliers de personnes descendant dans les rues de la ville pour manifester leur soutien aux victimes.
La réponse de la police a été critiquée pour son intervention tardive malgré la proximité d'un commissariat.
Les autoritĂ©s ont depuis arrĂȘtĂ© 21 personnes, dont 11 mineur·es, en lien avec l'attaque. Le plus jeune ayant seulement 14 ans.
AprĂšs que la Cour suprĂȘme russe ait banni je cite le « mouvement international LGBTQ+ » en fin d’annĂ©e 2023, la Russie a dĂ©sormais placĂ© ce mouvement sur sa liste de personnes ou associations dĂ©clarĂ©es comme Ă©tant « terroristes et extrĂ©mistes ».
Cette liste est tenue Ă  jour par une agence appelĂ©e Rosfinmonitoring, qui a le pouvoir de geler les comptes bancaires de plus de 14 000 personnes et entitĂ©s dĂ©signĂ©es comme extrĂ©mistes et terroristes. (Cette liste ratisse assez large puisque cela va d’Al-QaĂŻda, Ă  la sociĂ©tĂ© Meta, en passant par les associé·es de l’ex-chef de l’opposition russe Alexei Navalny).
Le président du Salvador, Nayib Bukele, a interdit et fait retirer officiellement tous les matériels pédagogiques concernant « l'idéologie du genre » dans toutes les écoles publiques du pays.
Tout responsable scolaire qui violerait la directive du ministĂšre fera face Ă  des consĂ©quences juridiques, selon le ministre de l’Éducation.
Une Ă©tude rĂ©cente, impliquant 552 jeunes, publiĂ©e dans la revue mĂ©dicale Jama Pediatrics a rĂ©vĂ©lĂ© que seulement 1% des moins de 18 ans rĂ©fĂ©ré·es Ă  un service de genre pour jeunes en Australie entre 2014 et 2020 ont choisi de faire marche arriĂšre aprĂšs avoir commencĂ© Ă  recevoir un traitement de type hormones ou bloqueurs de pubertĂ©. Ce qui signifie que 99% d’entre elleux n’ont pas changĂ© d’avis.
La communauté trans de Karachi au Pakistan a organisé une manifestation devant le Karachi Press Club en réponse à une récente attaque de foule contre des femmes trans courant mars.
Les militant·es trans ont exprimé leurs préoccupations concernant le manque de droits fondamentaux et de respect, soulignant la vulnérabilité de leur communauté et l'absence de soutien du gouvernement. Iels ont demandé une action concrÚte et ont averti qu'en l'absence de progrÚs, iels bloqueraient les routes principales de Karachi.
La star nĂ©erlandaise de flĂ©chettes, Noa-Lyn van Leuven, a fait face Ă  une controverse aprĂšs avoir remportĂ© des titres historiques contre des hommes et des femmes au cours de la mĂȘme semaine.
Elle a d'abord remporté le tournoi mixte PDC Challenge Tour en Allemagne, devenant la premiÚre femme à remporter un événement de cette série. Elle a ensuite remporté un tournoi féminin au Royaume-Uni, battant 2 joueuses vétérans bien classées, dont la numéro un actuelle.
Des critiques s’en sont suivies contre sa participation et ses victoires, certaines personnes affirmant qu'elle avait un avantage biologique au jeu des flĂ©chettes. (Parce qu’effectivement c’est bien connu que les femmes trans ont un avantage indĂ©niable pour viser une cible
 Tout le monde sait ça !)
Et 2 joueuses ont quitté la sélection néerlandaise, car elles refusent de jouer avec une coéquipiÚre trans. La Fédération néerlandaise de fléchettes a indiqué regretter cette décision, mais maintient son soutien à Van Leuven qui « répond à toutes les exigences » lui permettant de jouer dans la catégorie féminine.
J’étais passĂ© complĂštement Ă  cĂŽtĂ© de cette histoire, mais Patrick Beja du podcast Le RDV Jeux, ainsi que ses invité·es, en particulier le journaliste Cassim Montilla, ont abordĂ© le sujet en appuyant sur le caractĂšre transphobe de l’affaire donc j’me suis dis que j’allai en parler briĂšvement.
On est un peu face au Gamergate 2.0.
Sweet Baby Inc, une petite entreprise canadienne de consulting en narration dans le jeu-vidĂ©o, est accusĂ©e de « wokiser » (alors je ne sais pas si le terme existe mais passons...) les grosses productions jv comme God of War Ragnarok, Alan Wake 2 ou encore Spiderman (qui sont pourtant 3 jeux oĂč vous jouez un personnage principal blanc cishet masuclin – ‘fin truc habituel hein).
D’aprĂšs des internautes, plutĂŽt orienté·es droite et extrĂȘme-droite MAGA – donc trumpist hein -, l’entreprise aurait obligĂ© les dev Ă  intĂ©grer plus d’inclusivitĂ© dans leurs jeux. (Ce qui n’est pas le cas au passage, lorsqu’il y a consulting et relecture, ce sont les boites de dev qui en font la demande explicite pour amĂ©liorer la narration et crĂ©ation de leurs jeux.)
Ces personnes prĂ©sentent aussi l’entreprise comme Ă©tant un « cancer idĂ©ologique qui ruine les jeux-vidĂ©o » et qui serait anti-homme cis blanc, Ă  forcer Ă  mettre des personnages trans partout.
Tout ça a résulté à plusieurs choses :
Une vague de harcĂšlement Ă  l’encontre de l’entreprise et ses employé·es ;
La crĂ©ation d’un groupe Steam (Pour les gens qui ne le sauraient pas, Steam est une plateforme de distribution numĂ©rique de jeux vidĂ©o sur PC) – qui liste tous les jeux auxquels la boite aurait fait de la relecture pour appeler Ă  les boycotter. - Dans la rĂ©alitĂ©, le travail effectuĂ© ne comprends pas toujours de la relecture inclusive selon les jeux. -
Et surtout d’un serveur Discord oĂč de nombreux messages et images Ă  caractĂšre transphobe, raciste et/ou misogyne pullulent allĂšgrement. C’est la foire Ă  la saucisse ! Et c’est tel, que les membres sont mĂȘme appelé·es Ă  utiliser Telegram, qui est une application de messagerie offrant la possibilitĂ© de communiquer de maniĂšre privĂ©e avec des messages chiffrĂ©s de bout en bout pour contrĂŽler la confidentialitĂ© des discussions, lorsqu’on est sur des discours qui dĂ©passent un seuil de violence (on va dire ça comme ça) qui ferait sauter le serveur Discord.
On termine avec les États-Unis. CĂŽtĂ© lĂ©gislation ce mois-ci nous avons :
- Une cour d’appel fĂ©dĂ©rale qui a autorisĂ© l’entrĂ©e en vigueur immĂ©diate de l’interdiction des soins d’affirmation de genre dans l’Indiana.
- Le Wyoming qui est devenu le dernier État amĂ©ricain en date Ă  interdire les soins d'affirmation de genre pour les mineur·es trans, rejoignant 23 autres États du pays qui ont adoptĂ© des lois restreignant ou interdisant ces types de soins.
- La législature du Kansas qui vient d'adopter un projet de loi qui exigera 2 choses :
La suppression de tous comptes de réseaux sociaux appartenant aux personnes de 14 ans et moins.
Et une vérification de l'ùge pour accéder à tout site qui « publie ou distribue du matériel préjudiciable aux mineur·es ».
A premiĂšre vue, on peut se dire « Bon, pourquoi pas. Ça Ă©vitera que les gamin·es tombent sur des sites pour adultes ». Alors, oui. Mais pas que !
Dans les faits, la formulation de la loi fait que ça va aussi s’appliquer pour tout sites ayant un contenu LGBTQ+ ou bien orientĂ©s Ă©ducation Ă  la vie affective et sexuelle.
Lorsqu’on parle de vĂ©rification d’ñge, ce ne sera pas juste cliquer sur un bouton pop up disant « j’atteste que j’ai bien 18 ans » hein. On parle ici de fournir une carte d’identitĂ© ou bien une carte bancaire. Quelque chose qui, factuellement, prouve que vous ĂȘtes bien majeur·e. Il n’y a peu de marche de manƓuvre pour tenter de contourner la chose.
Ce qui pose, bien Ă©videmment problĂšme lorsqu’on est en questionnement et en recherche de rĂ©ponses ou de reprĂ©sentation Ă  ces Ăąges lĂ . Et qu’on ne peut pas ou ne se sent pas Ă  l’aise avec le fait de questionner ses proches sur ces sujets.
Sans parler du fait que ça s’appliquera pour toutes les personnes du Kansas qui utilisent ces plateformes. On sera sur du stockage de masse de documents perso.
- Alors je sais que ces derniers mois j’ai dis que je ne traiterai plus des propositions de loi nĂ©gatives mais celle-ci est suffisamment fucked up pour la mentionner : Un nouveau projet de loi dans le Missouri inscrirait les profs sur le registre des infractions sexuelles s'iels « soutiennent et/ou contribuent Ă  la transition sociale » d'un ou une jeune trans. (Que ce soit l’usage des bons pronoms, un soutien matĂ©riel, du partage d’infos ou de ressources concernant les transitions sociales).
Ce serait catĂ©gorisĂ© comme un dĂ©lit de classe E, passible de peine pouvant aller jusqu'Ă  4 ans de prison et d’amendes pouvant atteindre 10 000 dollars.
Selon le Los Angeles Blade, il est prĂ©vu que ce projet de loi n'aboutisse pas en commission, mais tout de mĂȘme, cela reste inquiĂ©tant

- Un projet de loi interdisant les drapeaux queer et les discussions concernant les personnes LGBTQ+ dans les Ă©coles de l'Utah a Ă©tĂ© rejetĂ© par la Chambre des reprĂ©sentants de cet État.
- Un projet de loi visant à forcer les prof à mégenrer les élÚves trans et à leur interdire d'utiliser les bonnes toilettes à l'école a été rejeté en Arizona.
- Et pour terminer avec cette partie lĂ©gislation : Le conseil municipal de Sacramento, capitale de la Californie, a votĂ© Ă  l'unanimitĂ© pour dĂ©clarer la ville comme "sanctuaire pour les personnes trans", garantissant que ses ressources municipales ne seront pas utilisĂ©es pour criminaliser les personnes trans en quĂȘte de soins d’affirmation de genre, et ne coopĂ©reront pas avec celleux qui cherchent Ă  faire respecter des lois criminalisant ces soins dans d'autres États.
Dans le reste de l’actu USA :
- Des rĂ©publicain·es de l'Alabama demandent le licenciement d'une employĂ©e trans du Space Camp de la NASA aprĂšs qu'un homme ait signalĂ© sur Facebook la prĂ©sence de cette employĂ©e, sans qu'aucune allĂ©gation d'un comportement inappropriĂ© ne soit faite. L’affaire Ă  pris de l’ampleur aprĂšs que le compte Libs of Tiktok – encore lui
 - aie emboĂźtĂ© le pas pour en parler.
Des politiciens, dont le sénateur Tommy Tuberville, ont insinué que la simple présence d'une personne trans représentait un danger pour les enfants, amplifiant ainsi une panique morale selon laquelle les personnes trans sont intrinsÚquement dangereuses pour la sécurité des enfants.
Une pétition en soutien à l'employée du Space Camp a été lancée par le groupe Alabama Transgender Rights Action Coalition.
- Petit point sur l’affaire "WPATH Files".
Qu’est-ce que c’est que ce truc ?
C’est un document publiĂ© par des groupes anti-trans et promu par des activistes de droite, qui prĂ©tend rĂ©vĂ©ler des scandales mĂ©dicaux majeurs au sein de la WPATH (la World Professional Association for Transgender Health).
Ces fameux fichiers ont été rapidement partagés par presque toutes les grandes organisations anti-trans ainsi que par les journalistes qui les soutiennent.
Sauf qu’un examen minutieux effectuĂ© par la journaliste Erin Reed a rĂ©vĂ©lĂ© que ce dernier Ă©tait truffĂ© d’erreurs. 216 pour ĂȘtre prĂ©cis ! Ce qui est juste Ă©norme ! Parmi elles on retrouve des erreurs de citation ou encore d’interprĂ©tations trompeuses. En effet, le rapport dĂ©forme souvent les citations et les donnĂ©es mĂ©dicales, mĂ©lange identitĂ© de genre et sexualitĂ©, et prĂ©sente de maniĂšre fallacieuse des Ă©changes cliniques ordinaires comme des preuves de scandale. On peut y retrouver en plus une sĂ©lection biaisĂ©e et dĂ©contextualisĂ©e de messages de forums mĂ©dicaux.
Et surtout, il y a un aspects assez marquant du document qui critique les faibles taux de regrets chez les personnes trans, suggĂ©rant que leur bonheur serait "suspect". LittĂ©ralement les transitions fonctionnent, c’est tellement inconcevable et chelou pour les transphobes que ça en devient suspect !
Bref, on est face à un rapport chargé de manipulations visant à discréditer la WPATH.
- Twitter interdit de nouveau le mĂ©genrage et le deadnaming suite Ă  la mise Ă  jour plus que discrĂšte de ses conditions d’utilisation. La consĂ©quence ne sera que de "rĂ©duire la visibilitĂ© des publications" enfreignant Ă  rĂ©pĂ©tition cette politique. Cela ne s'appliquera que "lĂ  oĂč les lois locales l'exigent" et ce sera Ă  la victime de faire le signalement.
De plus, Elon Musk, le propriĂ©taire de la plateforme, connu pour ses positions transphobes, a laissĂ© entendre qu'il pourrait annuler Ă  nouveau la politique et que cette derniĂšre ne sera appliquĂ©e qu’au cas par cas. Chaya Raichik, qui gĂšre le compte transphobe Libs of TikTok, a reçu la confirmation de Musk lui assurant qu'elle ne serait pas suspendue malgrĂ© ses nombreuses violations de la politique

- On poursuit avec une info toujours en lien avec les rĂ©seaux sociaux. Un rapport GLAAD dĂ©nonce que Meta, propriĂ©taire de Facebook, Instagram, WhatsApp et Threads, malgrĂ© ses politiques d’utilisation interdisant la transphobie, tolĂšre toujours de maniĂšre flagrante et rĂ©currente les contenus haineux et discriminatoires envers les personnes trans sur ses plateformes.
On parle de contenus incluant des attaques haineuses, des allĂ©gations de "grooming", des mensonges sur les soins de santĂ© trans, des discours de dĂ©shumanisation, des appels Ă  la violence et mĂȘme des incitations au suicide.
Malgré de nombreux appels à l'action et les preuves fournies par la communauté LGBTQ+, Meta ne semble pas faire respecter ses propres politiques, laissant ainsi un environnement toxique et dangereux pour les personnes LGBTQ+ sur ses plateformes.
- Selon un autre sondage GLAAD, plus de 50 % des électeurices inscrit·es s'opposent à un ou une candidate qui parle fréquemment de restreindre l'accÚs aux soins de santé et à la participation aux sports pour les jeunes trans.
Cette opposition pourrait ĂȘtre prĂ©judiciable Ă  certain·es rĂ©publicain·es qui ont largement adoptĂ© des messages anti-trans en vue des Ă©lections de novembre, bien que cette stratĂ©gie ait eu dĂ©jĂ  peu de succĂšs lors des Ă©lections de mi-mandat de 2022.
- Suite de l’affaire Nex Benedict.
Le procureur du comtĂ© de Tulsa a dĂ©clarĂ© qu’un « dĂ©pĂŽt d’accusations criminelles n’est pas justifiĂ© » pour cette affaire. Ce qui signifie qu’il n’y aurait pas d'accusations, ni de rĂ©percussion pour les 3 Ă©lĂšves qui ont attaquĂ© violemment Nex Benedict la veille de sa mort. Le procureur a qualifiĂ© l’altercation d’« exemple de combat mutuel » 
Seconde info toujours concernant Nex Benedict :
Le rapport d’une page du mĂ©decin lĂ©giste de l’Oklahoma indique que l’ado se serait suicidĂ©. La cause probable du dĂ©cĂšs est rĂ©pertoriĂ©e comme Ă©tant une surdose d’un combo de Benadryl et de Prozac. Selon le Center for Disease Control and Prevention, ce sont deux mĂ©dicaments couramment utilisĂ©s lors des tentatives de suicide.
Bon.. Il y a quelques petites choses à détricoter là-dedans.
De 1) MĂȘme en tenant compte de la question du suicide de Nex Benedict (qui reste douteux – je reviendrai sur ça juste aprĂšs), l'agression qui l'a conduit Ă  l'hĂŽpital reste un crime de haine. Et le fait qu'une personne se suicide aprĂšs avoir Ă©tĂ© victime d'un tel crime est aussi grave que la mort d'un ado dans un homicide transphobe. Je le dis parce que la thĂšse du suicide a fait que certaines personnes transphobes minimisaient l’agression, en disant « Bah vous voyez encore un trans qui se fou en l’air ! Ça n’avait rien Ă  voir au final. ». (Les gens sont dĂ©cidĂ©ment toujours autant empathiques, ça fait plaisir Ă  voir
)
Et de 2) donc cette conclusion un peu étrange du suicide :
La famille de Nex Benedict a publiĂ© des informations qui ont Ă©tĂ© exclues du rapport du mĂ©decin lĂ©giste de l'Oklahoma. On peut y retrouver de multiples contusions, de multiples hĂ©morragies, de multiples lacĂ©rations et de multiples Ă©corchures qui ont Ă©tĂ© trouvĂ©es sur sa tĂȘte, qui dĂ©montrent de la gravitĂ© de l'agression avant sa mort.
Nex a Ă©tĂ© dĂ©crit dans l’appel au 911 comme Ă©tant « posturing ». Ça fait rĂ©fĂ©rence soit Ă  « decerebrate posturing » (une posture dĂ©cĂ©rĂ©brĂ©e), soit Ă  « decorticate posturing » (une posture dĂ©cortiquĂ©e) qui, dans les deux cas, sont des indicateurs assez clairs d'une lĂ©sion cĂ©rĂ©brale grave.
Et il ne faut pas oublier non plus, que le gamin a Ă©tĂ© reconduit chez lui sans qu’une pĂ©riode observatoire suffisante (Ă  savoir 72h dans ce genre de blessure) n’aie Ă©tĂ© mise en place par l’hĂŽpital. Ce qui pourrait expliquer la prise d’auto-mĂ©dication pour se soulager.
Donc, ça reste bizarre.
Suite Ă  cette affaire, le ministĂšre de l'Éducation Ă  ouvert une enquĂȘte fĂ©dĂ©rale. Ça a Ă©galement permis d’attirer l’attention sur la rĂ©cente nomination de Chaya Raichik, la fondatrice des Libs de TikTok, Ă  un rĂŽle consultatif au sein du ministĂšre de l'Éducation de l'État d'Oklahoma (bien qu’elle ne vive pas dans cet Ă©tat). Et des groupes de parents ont appelĂ©, dans une lettre ouverte, l’influenceuse transphobe Ă  « rester en dehors de [leur] État. ».
- Alex Franco, un jeune homme trans de 21 ans, a Ă©tĂ© tuĂ© par balle par 3 ado (ĂągĂ©s respectivement de 15, 17 et 17 ans) dans l'Utah. Alex avait Ă©tĂ© signalĂ© disparu par sa petite amie. Suite Ă  des recherches policiĂšres, son corps a Ă©tĂ© retrouvĂ© dans une zone dĂ©sertique de l'Utah. Les ado ont Ă©tĂ© arrĂȘtĂ©s et inculpĂ©s pour son enlĂšvement et son meurtre.
Un mémorial pour lui rendre hommage a été organisé par les amis et la famille d'Alex.
- Une Ă©tude Media Matters a rĂ©vĂ©lĂ© que la couverture mĂ©diatique de la lĂ©gislation anti-trans en 2023 – en particulier, dans le cas des lois qui cherchaient Ă  interdire ou Ă  restreindre l'accĂšs des personnes trans aux soins d'affirmation de genre ou aux Ă©tablissements publics – variait considĂ©rablement en termes de ton et de temps passĂ© sur les chaĂźnes cĂąblĂ©es.
Bien que toutes les chaĂźnes, indĂ©pendamment de leur orientation politique, aient abordĂ© le mĂȘme sujet, la maniĂšre dont elles l'ont traitĂ© diffĂ©rait considĂ©rablement.
Sur MSNBC et CNN, respectivement 42 % et 36 % des segments ont utilisé des recherches pour contredire les narratifs anti-trans ou la désinformation, tandis que sur Fox News, 49 % des segments ont soutenu des restrictions sur les soins d'affirmation de genre ou l'accÚs aux toilettes pour les personnes trans.
MalgrĂ© ces diffĂ©rences dans la maniĂšre dont ces rĂ©seaux ont abordĂ© ces lois en termes de ton et de temps allouĂ©, trĂšs peu de segments ont donnĂ© la parole Ă  des personnes trans. Sur MSNBC, seulement 22 % des segments ont inclus des invité·es ouvertement trans. Sur CNN, ce chiffre s'Ă©levait Ă  16 %. Et la situation Ă©tait encore plus catastrophique sur Fox News, oĂč aucune prĂ©sence trans n'a Ă©tĂ© observĂ©e, quand bien mĂȘme le rĂ©seau compte parmi ses employé·es la personnalitĂ© trans Caitlyn Jenner. (Bon pour cette derniĂšre, honnĂȘtement ce n’est pas plus mal hein. Elle a encore dĂ©clarĂ© ce mois-ci que les femmes trans ne sont pas de « vraies femmes » et a appelĂ© au retour des tests chromosomiques dans le sport. Comment tirer contre son propre camp
)
En 2024, la persistance de la tendance à la législation anti-trans souligne une fois de plus l'importance capitale des médias dans la maniÚre dont les expériences des personnes trans, les plus directement touchées par ces initiatives législatives, sont couvertes et comprises.
- Plus d'une douzaine d'athlÚtes universitaires ont intenté un recours collectif contre la National College Athletics Association (la NCAA), alléguant que l'organisation violait leurs droits en vertu de l'article IX en permettant aux athlÚtes trans de participer aux compétitions féminines.
Les 16 plaignantes, dont l'ancienne nageuse de l'Université du Kentucky Riley Gaines, accusent la NCAA de violer la loi fédérale anti-discrimination et de ne pas fournir un traitement égal aux femmes en permettant aux athlÚtes trans de concourir dans les ligues correspondant à leur identité de genre.
Iels cherchent des dommages punitifs pour le « stress émotionnel » occasionné, le retrait de Lia Thomas et d'autres athlÚtes trans des records officiels des femmes de la NCAA, ainsi qu'une interdiction des femmes trans dans les vestiaires féminins.
- Planet Fitness a exclu une de ses adhĂ©rentes pour avoir pris une photo d'une femme supposĂ©e trans dans ses vestiaires fĂ©minins qu’elle a ensuite partagĂ© sur le net.
MalgrĂ© les objections persistantes de Patricia Silva, la femme exclue – accessoirement partisane de Donald Trump –, la salle de sport a maintenu sa dĂ©cision de rĂ©silier son abonnement en raison de la violation de la politique interdisant de prendre des photos dans les vestiaires. Et en a profitĂ© pour rĂ©affirmer son engagement de longue date envers un environnement inclusif et respectueux de l'identitĂ© de genre de ses membres.
Silva s’est plainte sur Facebook que, je cite « Planet Fitness [avait] annulĂ© [son] adhĂ©sion et a permis au pĂ©dophile de rester. » Ses propos ont Ă©tĂ© relayĂ©es par la suite par le compte anti-trans Libs of TikTok qui a appelĂ© au boycott de la salle de sport.
- Et pour terminer, un rĂ©cent sondage en Caroline du Sud rĂ©vĂšle que 71 % des Ă©lecteurices inscrit·es, y compris une majoritĂ© de rĂ©publicains et rĂ©publicaines, estiment que le gouvernement ne devrait pas intervenir dans les dĂ©cisions mĂ©dicales concernant les soins de santĂ© des jeunes trans, Ă  partir du moment oĂč les parents sont impliqué·es dans cette prise de dĂ©cision.
La Caroline du Sud reste l’un des rares États contrĂŽlĂ©s par les RĂ©publicains Ă  ne pas avoir interdit les soins d’affirmation de genre pour les mineur·es et jeunes trans.
Du coup c’est intĂ©ressant d’avoir un rĂ©sultat aussi marquĂ© dans un contexte oĂč une proposition de loi allant dans ce sens est actuellement Ă  l'Ă©tude.
------
🔗 Les sources :
đŸ“ș AccĂ©der Ă  l'Ă©pisode avec ses sous-titres : 
🎧 AccĂ©der Ă  l'Ă©pisode au format audio :
1 note · View note
gwiazdaerydanu · 1 year ago
Video
youtube
This Is One of the Biggest Medical Malpractice Scandals in History | Michael Shellenberger
Dr. Jordan B. Peterson sits down with bestselling author and journalist Michael Shellenberger to discuss the shocking revelations now being published in the WPATH Files. 
 Michael Shellenberger is a climate activist, journalist, and bestselling author. He has covered climate for over 30 years, as well as AI, emergent technologies, the Twitter Files, and most recently, the WPATH files
0 notes
antropofagist · 1 year ago
Text
I hope jk rowling dies forever a painful death involving a car covered in hammer that explodes more than a few times and hammers go flying everywhere
9 notes · View notes
Text
Tumblr media Tumblr media
My name is Dr Jill Simons. I'm a board-certified pediatrician and the executive director for the American College of Pediatricians. Today I'm here alongside my colleagues representing the Coalition of co-signers of the Doctors Protecting Children Declaration. Our coalition consists of physicians together with nurses, behavioral health clinicians, other health professionals, scientists, researchers and public health and policy professionals. And we have serious concerns about the physical and mental health effects of the current protocols promoted for the care of children and adolescents in the United States who express discomfort with their biological sex.
This declaration was authored by the American College of Pediatricians, but really it was developed from the expertise of hundreds of doctors researchers and other healthcare workers and leaders wh, for years have been sounding the alarm on the harmful protocols that continue to be promoted by the medical organizations in the United States. Despite recent revelations from the leaked WPATH Files and the recent release of the final report from the Cass Review, these medical organizations have not changed course.
So, we are calling on these medical organizations of the United States, including the American Academy of Pediatrics, the Endocrine Society, the Pediatric Endocrine Society, the American Medical Association, the American Psychological Association and the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry to follow the science and their European colleagues and immediately stop the promotion of social affirmation, puberty blockers, cross-sex hormones and surgeries for children and adolescents who experience distress over their biological sex.
In our declaration, we affirm that sex is a dimorphic, innate trait defined in relation to an organism's biological role in reproduction: male and female this genetic signature is present in every nucleated somatic cell in the body and is not altered by drugs or surgical interventions. Consideration of these innate differences is critical to the practice of good medicine and to the development of sound policy for children and adults alike. Medical decision-making should be based upon an individual's biological sex. It should respect biological reality and the dignity of the person by compassionately addressing the whole person.
We are here defying the claims made by these medical organizations in the US that those of us who are concerned are a minority and that their protocols are consensus. They are not consensus, and we are speaking in a loud unified voice: enough.
[ Full press conference: https://youtu.be/C2tU90XPFlg ]
--
Doctors Protecting Children Declaration
As physicians, together with nurses, psychotherapists and behavioral health clinicians, other health professionals, scientists, researchers, and public health and policy professionals, we have serious concerns about the physical and mental health effects of the current protocols promoted for the care of children and adolescents in the United States who express discomfort with their biological sex.
We affirm:
1. Sex is a dimorphic, innate trait defined in relation to an organism’s biological role in reproduction. In humans, primary sex determination occurs at fertilization and is directed by a complement of sex determining genes on the X and Y chromosomes.  This genetic signature is present in every nucleated somatic cell in the body and is not altered by drugs or surgical interventions
2. Consideration of these innate differences is critical to the practice of good medicine and to the development of sound public policy for children and adults alike.
3. Gender ideology, the view that sex (male and female) is inadequate and that humans need to be further categorized based on an individual’s thoughts and feelings described as “gender identity” or “gender expression”, does not accommodate the reality of these innate sex differences. This leads to the inaccurate view that children can be born in the wrong body. Gender ideology seeks to affirm thoughts, feelings and beliefs, with puberty blockers, hormones, and surgeries that harm healthy bodies, rather than affirm biological reality.
4. Medical decision making should not be based upon an individual’s thoughts and feelings, as in “gender identity” or “gender expression”, but rather should be based upon an individual’s biological sex. Medical decision making should respect biological reality and the dignity of the person by compassionately addressing the whole person.
We recognize:
1. Most children and adolescents whose thoughts and feelings do not align with their biological sex will resolve those mental incongruencies after experiencing the normal developmental process of puberty.
Desistance is the norm without affirmation as documented by Zucker in his article “The Myth of Peristence”. (1) Zucker, KJ. The myth of persistence: Response to “A critical commentary on follow-up studies and ‘desistance’ theories about transgender and gender nonconforming children” by Temple Newhook et al. International Journal of Transgenderism. 2018: 19(2), 231–245. Published online May 29, 2018.http://doi.org/10.1080/15532739.2018.1468293 [1]
In the “largest sample to date of boys clinic-referred for gender dysphoria,” there was a desistance rate of 87.8%. (2) Singh D, Bradley SJ and Zucker KJ. A Follow-Up Study of Boys With Gender Identity Disorder. Front Psychiatry. 2021;12:632784. doi: 10.3389/fpsyt.2021.632784
The pro-affirmation Endocrine Society Guidelines (2017) admit: “
the GD/gender incongruence of a minority of prepubertal children appears to persist in adolescence.” (3) Hembree, W., Cohen-Kettenis PT, Gooren L, et al. Endocrine treatment of gender-dysphoric/gender-incongruent persons: An Endocrine Society clinical practice guideline J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2017; 102:1–35.
A longitudinal study from the University of Groningen in the Netherlands followed 2772 adolescents (recruited from a psychiatric clinic) from age 11 years through 22 – 26 years. “In early adolescence 11% of participants reported gender non- contentedness. The prevalence decreased with age and was 4% at the last follow-up (around age 26).” Even in this psychiatric patient study group for which interventions were not addressed, but “gender affirmation” is most likely, gender non-contentedness (essentially gender noncongruence) decreased substantially from early adolescence to young adulthood.(4) Rawee P, Rosmalen JGM, Kalverdiijk L and Burke SM. Development of gender non-contentedness during adolescence and early adulthood. Archives of Sexual Behavior. 2024; https://doi.org/10.1007/s10508-024-02817-5
2. Responsible informed consent is not possible in light of extremely limited long-term follow-up studies of interventions, and the immature, often impulsive, nature of the adolescent brain. The adolescent brain’s prefrontal cortex is immature and is limited in its ability to strategize, problem solve and make emotionally laden decisions that have life-long consequences.[2]
3. Sex-trait modification or “Gender affirming” clinics in the United States base their treatments upon the “Standards of Care” developed by the World Professional Association for Transgender Health (WPATH). However, the foundation of WPATH guidelines is demonstrably flawed and pediatric patients can be harmed when subjected to those protocols.
The two Dutch studies that form the foundation for treatment guidelines as documented in the WPATH “Standards of Care” guidelines version 7 (SOC 7) had serious flaws.[3]
These studies did show that the appearance of secondary sex characteristics in adolescents and young adults could be changed by hormonal and surgical interventions, but they failed to demonstrate meaningful long-term improvement in psychological well-being.
Scientific concerns with these studies also include a lack of a control group, small sample sizes, significant numbers of patients lost to follow up, and the elimination of patients who experienced significant mental illness from entering the studies.
It is concerning that the Dutch studies did not address complications and adverse outcome in the adolescent cohort that underwent transition. These complications included new onset diabetes, obesity and one death.[4]
4. There is now sufficient research to further demonstrate the failure of the WPATH, American Academy of Pediatrics and Endocrine Society protocols.
The Cass Review was released on April 10, 2024, as an “independent review of gender identity services for children and young people”. The following points are from Cass’s final report:[5]
Commissioned by the National Health Service (NHS) England, and chaired by Dr. Hilary Cass, the 388-page report utilized systematic reviews, qualitative and quantitative research, as well as focus groups, roundtables and interviews with international clinicians and policy makers.
As part of the evaluation, they reviewed the research on social transition, puberty blockers, and cross-sex hormones.
Social transition
“The systematic review showed no clear evidence that social transition in childhood has any positive or negative mental health outcomes, and relatively weak evidence for any effect in adolescence.
However, those who had socially transitioned at an earlier age and/or prior to being seen in clinic were more likely to proceed to a medical pathway.”
Puberty blockers
“The systematic review undertaken by the University of York found multiple studies demonstrating that puberty blockers exert their intended effect in suppressing puberty, and also that bone density is compromised during puberty suppression. However, no changes in gender dysphoria or body satisfaction were demonstrated [emphasis added].”
“There was insufficient/inconsistent evidence about the effects of puberty suppression on psychological or psychosocial wellbeing, cognitive development, cardio-metabolic risk or fertility.”
“Moreover, given that the vast majority of young people started on puberty blockers proceed from puberty blockers to masculinizing/ feminizing hormones, there is no evidence that puberty blockers buy time to think, and some concern that they may change the trajectory of psychosexual and gender identity development.”
Cross-sex hormones
“The University of York carried out a systematic review of outcomes of masculinising/feminising hormones.” They concluded, “There is a lack of high-quality research assessing the outcomes of hormone interventions in adolescents with gender dysphoria/incongruence, and few studies that undertake long-term follow-up. No conclusions can be drawn about the effect on gender dysphoria, body satisfaction, psychosocial health, cognitive development, or fertility.”
“Uncertainty remains about the outcomes for height/growth, cardio-metabolic and bone health.”
The Cass Review further stated, “Assessing whether a hormone pathway is indicated is challenging. A formal diagnosis of gender dysphoria is frequently cited as a prerequisite for accessing hormone treatment. However, it is not reliably predictive of whether that young person will have longstanding gender incongruence in the future, or whether medical intervention will be the best option for them.”
A 2024 German systematic review on the evidence for use of puberty blockers (PB) and cross-sex hormones (CSH) in minors with gender dysphoria (GD) also found “The available evidence on the use of PB and CSH in minors with GD is very limited and based on only a few studies with small numbers, and these studies have problematic methodology and quality. There also is a lack of adequate and meaningful long-term studies. Current evidence doesn’t suggest that GD symptoms and mental health significantly improve when PB or CSH are used in minors with GD.”[6]  
5. There are serious long-term risks associated with the use of social transition, puberty blockers, masculinizing or feminizing hormones, and surgeries, not the least of which is potential sterility.
Youth who are socially affirmed are more likely to progress to using puberty blockers and cross-sex (masculinizing or feminizing) hormones.
“Social transition is associated with the persistence of gender dysphoria as a child progresses into adolescence.”[7]
“Gender social transition of prepubertal children will increase dramatically the rate of gender dysphoria persistence when compared to follow-up studies of children with gender dysphoria who did not receive this type of psychosocial intervention and, oddly enough, might be characterized as iatrogenic.”[8]
Puberty blockers permanently disrupt physical, cognitive, emotional and social development.
Side effects listed in the Lupron package insert include emotional lability, worsening psychological illness, low bone density, impaired memory, and the rare side-effect of pseudotumor cerebri (brain swelling).[9]
A coalition of physicians and medical organizations from around the world submitted a petition to the Commissioner of the U.S. Food and Drug Administration requesting urgent action be taken to eliminate the off-label use of GnRH (growth hormone) agonists in children.[10]
Testosterone use in females and estrogen use in males are associated with dangerous health risks across the lifespan including, but not limited to, cardiovascular disease, high blood pressure, heart attacks, blood clots, stroke, diabetes, and cancer.[xi],[12]
Genital surgeries affect future fertility and reproduction.
6. A report from Environmental Progress released on March 4, 2024, entitled “The WPATH Files” revealed “widespread medical malpractice on children and vulnerable adults at global transgender healthcare authority.”[13]
“The WPATH Files reveal that the organization does not meet the standards of evidence-based medicine, and members frequently discuss improvising treatments as they go along.”
“Members are fully aware that children and adolescents cannot comprehend the lifelong consequences of ‘gender-affirming care’ and, in some cases due to poor health literacy, neither can their parents.”
In addition, developmentally challenged and mentally ill individuals were being encouraged to “transition”, and treatments were often improvised.
7. Evidence-based medical research now demonstrates there is little to no benefit from any or all suggested “gender affirming” interventions for adolescents experiencing Gender Dysphoria. Social “affirmation”, puberty blockers, masculinizing or feminizing hormones, and surgeries, individually or in combination, do not appear to improve long-term mental health of the adolescents, including suicide risk.[14]
8. Psychotherapy for underlying mental health issues such as depression, anxiety, and autism, as well as prior emotional trauma or abuse should be the first line of treatment for these vulnerable children experiencing discomfort with their biological sex.
9. England, Scotland, Sweden, Denmark, and Finland have all recognized the scientific research demonstrating that the social, hormonal and surgical interventions are not only unhelpful but are harmful. So, these European countries have paused protocols and are instead focusing on evaluating and treating the underlying and preceding mental health concerns.
10. Other medical organizations are adhering to the evidence-based medicine documented in the Cass Review Final Report.
The constitution of the National Health Service in England will be updated to state, “We are defining sex as biological sex.”[15]
The European Society of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry issued a document titled “ESCAP statement on the care for children and adolescents with gender dysphoria: an urgent need for safeguarding clinical, scientific, and ethical standards.”
In this paper, they stated, “The standards of evidence-based medicine must ensure the best and safest possible care for each individual in this highly vulnerable group of children and adolescents. As such, ESCAP calls for healthcare providers not to promote experimental and unnecessarily invasive treatments with unproven psycho-social effects and, therefore, to adhere to the “primum-nil-nocere” (first, do no harm) principle”.[16]
11. Health care professionals around the world are also acknowledging the urgent need to protect children from harmful “gender-affirming” interventions.
In a letter to the British newspaper, The Guardian, sixteen psychologists, some of whom worked at the Tavistock Center for Gender Identity Development Service, acknowledged the role clinical psychologists played in placing children on an “irreversible medical pathway that in most cases was inappropriate.”[17]
In the United States, a group of psychiatrists, physicians and other health care workers wrote an open Letter to the American Psychiatric Association (APA), calling on the APA to explain why it glaringly ignored many scientific developments in gender-related care and to consider its responsibility to promote and protect patients’ safety, mental and physical health.[18]
12. Despite all the above evidence that gender affirming treatments are not only unhelpful, but are harmful, and despite the knowledge that the adolescent brain is immature, professional medical organizations in the United States continue to promote these interventions. Further, they state that legislation to protect children from harmful interventions is dangerous since it interferes with necessary medical care for children and adolescents.
The American Psychological Association states it is the largest association of psychologists worldwide. The organization released a policy statement in February 2024 stating, “The APA opposes state bans on gender-affirming care, which are contrary to the principles of evidence-based healthcare, human rights, and social justice.”[19]
The Endocrine Society responded to the Cass Review by reaffirming their stance. “We stand firm in our support of gender-affirming care
. NHS England’s recent report, the Cass Review, does not contain any new research that would contradict the recommendations made in our Clinical Practice Guideline on gender-affirming care.”[20]
The American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) Board of Directors in August 2023, voted to reaffirm their 2018 policy statement on gender-affirming care. They did decide to authorize a systematic review but only because they were concerned “about restrictions to access to health care with bans on gender-affirming care in more than 20 states.”[21]
Of note, Dr. Hilary Cass called out the AAP for “holding on to a position that is now demonstrated to be out of date by multiple systematic reviews.”[22]
In Conclusion
Therefore, given the recent research and the revelations of the harmful approach advocated by WPATH and its followers in the United States, we, the undersigned, call upon the medical professional organizations of the United States, including the American Academy of Pediatrics, the  Endocrine Society, the Pediatric Endocrine Society, American Medical Association, the American Psychological Association, and the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry to follow the science and their European professional colleagues and immediately stop the promotion of social affirmation, puberty blockers, cross-sex hormones and surgeries for children and adolescents who experience distress over their biological sex.  Instead, these organizations should recommend comprehensive evaluations and therapies aimed at identifying and addressing underlying psychological co-morbidities and neurodiversity that often predispose to and accompany gender dysphoria. We also encourage the physicians who are members of these professional organizations to contact their leadership and urge them to adhere to the evidence-based research now available.
17 notes · View notes
justinspoliticalcorner · 1 year ago
Text
Erin Reed at Erin In The Morning:
On Wednesday, Dr. Hillary Cass gave her first American interview with NPR about the Cass Review. The review, which appears heavily politicized and lends credence to debunked theories about being transgender, such as "social contagion," is being used as a pretext to ban care in the United Kingdom. In the interview, Cass called for "other ways" of managing dysphoria besides transitioning and blamed being trans on factors such as autism and pornography. However, one particular point of note was her response to a question about the evidence supporting gender-affirming care, where she suggested that the real measure of transition success should be the employment status of transgender people. When asked about “actual outcomes” for the effectiveness of cross-sex hormones in transgender youth, Cass sated that there was a need for long followups to see if transgender people thrive on hormones, and that the outcomes that she was most interested in included employment, “getting out of the house,” and relationships. See her answer here:
[CHAKRABARTI: Regarding cross sex hormones, the systematic review authors said there is a lack of high-quality research assessing the actual outcomes of cross sex hormones. CASS: Yes, because we need to follow up for much longer than a year or two to know if you continue to thrive on those hormones in the longer term. And we also need to know, are those young people in relationships? Are they getting out of the house? Are they in employment? Do they have a satisfactory sex life?] It is important to note that all of these potential outcome measurements may be heavily influenced by transphobic sentiments in society. Should transgender people be judged on their ability to be "employed" or their willingness to "get out of the house," their own discrimination may then be used against their ability to access medication. According to the National Center for Transgender Equality, more than one in four transgender people have lost a job due to bias, and three-quarters report experiencing workplace discrimination. Therefore, it is inaccurate to blame transgender people and their medication for what appears to be an issue with societal discrimination.
In recent years, many reports have emerged showing high levels of satisfaction and low levels of detransition for transgender people. A recent report in the 2022 US transgender survey shows that out of 90,000 transgender people, less than 1% report feeling less satisfied after beginning gender affirming hormone therapy, with the vast majority feeling “a lot more satisfied.” Detransition appears to be similarly rare. One recent study out of Australia found complete data on 548 of 552 transgender patients and discovered only 1% of transgender youth detransitioned over several years before being transferred to adult services. Another study showed that transgender youth are stable in their gender identity 5 years after transitioning, with only 2.5% reidentifying as their assigned sex at birth. Even Cass’s own report found less than 10 detransitioners out of the 3,000 trans youth patients in England, which led to her claiming that the real reason she didn’t find more detransitioners is because adult clinics refused to provide private patient data.
Dr. Hilary Cass, the woman behind the anti-trans Cass Review, made absurd claims that a person’s transition success should be measured by their employment status instead of satisfaction and joy.
See Also:
Assigned Media: TWIBS: Cass Says Porn Makes You Trans
10 notes · View notes
doberbutts · 11 months ago
Text
Things you may have missed:
>had top surgery scheduled March 12th
>top surgery cancelled literally the day of because my insurance rejected my therapist letter the day prior. surgeon refused to take any steps towards patient advocacy.
>top surgery re-scheduled to June 21st
>top surgery cancelled literally 3 days prior due to the same fucking shit even though I followed the instructions the insurance told me to to a T. surgeon again refused to file for an appeal or request a peer-to-peer. told me just to do what insurance said. I asked why insurance was not following the WPATH guidelines. was not given an answer.
>had a consult with a different surgeon today.
>oh my fucking god what a difference. I told him about the fuckery and he was absolutely flabberghasted and told me he'd never even heard of a doctor who would not allow their patient their right to an appeal of an insurance decision, especially knowing that many times insurances will authorize once the doctor yells at them about it. I also found his bedside manner to be much better and he was much easier to work with for projected outcomes
>tentatively looking at some time in November. Maybe for my 32nd birthday I'll give myself the gift of No Tits
388 notes · View notes
mybeautifulchristianjourney · 1 year ago
Text
There have been numerous reports over the years that have found that “gender affirming care” is not based in scientific fact and is harmful for those who partake in it — especially children. However, two recent factors have served to significantly increase the urgency of those calling for an end to gender transition procedures.
In May, the World Professional Association for Transgender Health (WPATH) files were leaked, which “revealed that the clinicians who shape how ‘gender medicine’ is regulated and practiced around the world consistently violate medical ethics and informed consent.” Additionally, a groundbreaking...
24 notes · View notes
feminist-furby-freak · 1 year ago
Text
I know I shouldn’t surprised anymore but I’m still shocked that no one is talking about the WPATH files leak!!!!
21 notes · View notes
darkmaga-returns · 2 months ago
Text
Story at a Glance: ‱Irreversible hormone blockers have dozens of severe side effects which affect between 5-50% of users. Millions have been injured by these drugs, and dozens of lawsuits have been filed by those they permanently disabled.
‱Originally approved as an end of the line option for advanced prostate cancer, their use skyrocketed once they were priced so thousands of dollars could be made each time they were administered. ‱A wide range of dubious uses were then concocted for these drugs such as treating a wide range of gynecologic conditions and blocking puberty.
‱WPATH writes the guidelines for transgender medicine and exuberantly endorses giving hormone blockers to children while simultaneously denying and downplaying the dangers of this practice. Recent leaks revealed WPATH knows how dangerous this is and that they are in fact conducting a giant experiment.
3 notes · View notes
gwiazdaerydanu · 1 year ago
Link
0 notes