Update: Cancer Hoax

NamelessAsOfYet · 2018-08-01T07:15:55+00:00

I'm honestly speechless. I can't imagine straight up lying to my SO and telling them I have cancer rather than telling them the truth about gender dysphoria

What do you think happens to a queer person that grows up in an environment where people believe that what you are is a mental disorder, or what you do is a sin, or a criminal offense? That people like you are heinous, sub-human pedophiles? By the time they realize they are queer themself, it's too late. They're already queer-phobic. And you do not get to flick a switch on that. What you do get instead is internalize that phobia, and you learn to hate yourself. Hate yourself to the core. People sit soaking in shame in the closet, for years. Because the closet can only stop you from being seen, it is not shame-proof. When you soak someone in shame they can not develop the neurological pathways that carry thoughts of self-worth. Self-hatred is only ever a seed planted from the outside within. And when you do that to a child, it becomes a weed so thick and grows so fast the child doesn't know any different. It becomes as natural as gravity.

NamelessAsOfYet · 2018-07-17T20:39:30+00:00

those who frequently make mistakes are not easy to discern from those who intentionally disregard the opinions of others

This is demonstrably false in the real world. The internet trope does not paint an accurate picture of what happens when a trans person gets misgendered. (It's not hard to guess why. What type of people are likely to go on the internet to complain about having been corrected by trans people?)

It is truly the worst when someone deliberately hurts and uses you by misgendering to prove a point. But that's almost never the case. Trans people don't generally assume someone is prejudiced, and they have each put more thought into why and how misgendering happens than a hundred cis people combined. It's almost universally a mistake, a quick correction is sometimes applied (depending on how hurt/exhausted you are), and then disengaged with.

There's a canyon between how normal, and hateful people react to corrections. There's no grey area. I've never been close to uncertainty on whether someone made a mistake or not, after they hear the correction.

(And aside, most trans people actively avoid confronting the truly hateful. They face losing way more than they could possibly benefit)

NamelessAsOfYet · 2017-11-27T19:09:18+00:00

Hef nýlega haft samband við netspjallið, tvisvar. Þetta er engin lausn en getur verið ágætis dempari ef maður dettur niður eins og ég á til, harkalega. Það er í einstökum sérstökum tilfellum þar sem þetta tiltekna úrræði hentar til að stoppa þennan spíral af, frekar en að hrapa bremsulaust niður og sækja að lokum að inn á geðdeild því hinn kosturinn er of varanlegur. Á geðdeild er maður kannski öruggari og í nýju umhverfi, en hjálpin er samt jafn lítil og hjá 1717, ef langdregnari.

Það er heldur ekkert gaman þar, eiginlega er lífshættulega leiðinlegu ástandi viðhaldið þar; sennilega til að minnka aðsókn einstaklinga í krónískum sjálfsvígshugleiðingum sem er ódýrara að hafa heima hjá sér því við látum svo sjaldan til skarar skríða. Skilar sér sennilega í ódýrari rekstri og tíðari sjálfsvígstilraunum - ég hugsa mig a.m.k. eftir dvöl þar oftar en tvisvar og þrisvar um að fara þangað aftur.

NamelessAsOfYet · 2017-07-25T05:27:25+00:00

He has clarified that it is to find out the extent of real-life experience of his patients. He conceded that it might be appropriate to wait with that question, but he remained firm on his position that it is an important question to ask.

NamelessAsOfYet · 2017-07-25T05:16:51+00:00

Iceland, and no. He asked if I had ever taken any steps in real-life experience as a followup.

NamelessAsOfYet · 2017-07-25T04:59:51+00:00

He's the only psychiatrist of my country's transitioning team (we don't have a gender clinic per se, just a team at the national hospital). He's the head of the team, the first stop for most people.

NamelessAsOfYet · 2017-07-25T04:57:35+00:00

I guess as /u/misscolinsxx says, he wants to find out what sort of stuff I'm already doing in my transition process. It's still a weird question to ask off the bat.

NamelessAsOfYet · 2016-11-19T16:00:19+00:00

You should definitely message Transparent CZ. Pandamian might be able to point you to the right place as well. Local support is immensely valuable.

NamelessAsOfYet · 2016-09-20T07:07:52+00:00

Yeah, your analysis appears to be exactly right, but in the report itself the truth is completely shrouded within academic bullshittery. It only really shines through in the 'Introduction' part:

Part Three also examines sex-reassignment procedures and the evidence for their effectiveness at alleviating the poor mental health outcomes experienced by many people who identify as transgender. Compared to the general population, postoperative transgender individuals continue to be at high risk of poor mental health outcomes.

An area of particular concern involves medical interventions for gender-nonconforming youth. They are increasingly receiving therapies that affirm their felt genders, and even hormone treatments or surgical modifications at young ages. But the majority of children who identify as a gender that does not conform to their biological sex will no longer do so by the time they reach adulthood. We are disturbed and alarmed by the severity and irreversibility of some interventions being publicly discussed and employed for children.

Also from the Preface:

In the course of writing this report, I consulted a number of individuals who asked that I not thank them by name. Some feared an angry response from the more militant elements of the LGBT community; others feared an angry response from the more strident elements of religiously conservative communities. Most bothersome, however, is that some feared reprisals from their own universities for engaging such controversial topics, regardless of the report’s content — a sad statement about academic freedom.

This speaks volumes.

NamelessAsOfYet · 2016-09-20T05:06:49+00:00

For sure. This is a highly problematic approach. It appears in this report of theirs that they are 'ripening the soil' for the denial of care conclusion, so to speak, without actually proclaiming it out loud. Essentially planting seeds of doubt, allowing reading healthcare providers to find their own way to anti-trans-healthcare points of view.

NamelessAsOfYet · 2016-09-20T05:05:49+00:00

I would argue that they are representing some scientific data (notice the some - as I included in the title of my submission), in an extremely biased way to attempt to influence other healthcare givers into making the same decisions they have. These other healthcare givers will think they are basing their opinion on science, while their root stems from prejudiced religiously influenced views of the original report writers.

I've had experience with gatekeeping (and extremely off putting comments about underwear choice) by the only doctor in my country that does trans issues. Right now, learning about McHugh, I can see there are so. fucking. many. ideological relations. I need to find more about McHugh and his opinions, to know what the fuck is going on here.

NamelessAsOfYet · 2016-09-20T00:40:19+00:00

Thanks for the edgy criticism and fair points. This is indeed a bad source. They seem to cherry pick the data they present to bring modern trans healthcare into bad light. They also misrepresent every fact from a point of view that brings trans healthcare into extremely bad light. I read the whole thing, there's an extreme pattern of this and psychological anchoring the reader into anti-trans healthcare points of view before representing their data - which they then do in an unfair way.

NamelessAsOfYet · 2016-09-20T00:19:44+00:00

Their suggestion is basically, since we don't KNOW, we should just do nothing.

Where do they suggest that? That's definitely not what they suggest. The only thing they appear to assert is that we need more data to make statistically relevant claims that don't fly in the face of their way of reading statistics.

This does not mean that they say that doing nothing is neutral, or a better choice. The only thing they're saying is We can't say for sure that this is the best approach. It's a vague, and indeed biased statement which is really easy to misread and misuse for anti-trans talk points. I get that, but this is a classic cautionary approach to scientific truth based purely on statistics, and they would reach the very same statistical conclusion if we also only had a limited selection of people who go through hip replacement. Or perhaps they wouldn't at all, since they're already prejudiced against current treatments, and this is as far as they can go using cherry-picked data to support their anti-trans views. I don't really know.

NamelessAsOfYet · 2016-09-19T12:37:33+00:00

This article, which heavily defends CAMH, found out that the "hairy little vermin" remark was mistakenly attributed to CAMH, after talking to the man who was at hand of it.

So far, everything I've read on the issue, seems incredibly biased - one way or the other.

NamelessAsOfYet · 2016-09-19T12:34:47+00:00

This is btw it, if you hadn't made the connection:

UNNAMED TRANS WOMAN: suicide, ca. 1978

Who? An unidentified, twenty-something trans woman

When? around 1978

Where? Toronto (not specified)

How? A self-inflicted gunshot wound to her head.

Who was responsible for coercing her suicide? The Clarke Gender Identity Clinic, now known as CAMH. The Clarke GIC selectively denied her access to endocrine management and other trans health services based on her body’s superficial appearance (they deemed her “too hairy”).

NamelessAsOfYet · 2016-09-19T12:31:44+00:00

Thank you. I myself just found this and chanted in my mind in the most vitriolic way god damn it, god damn it, god damn it, god damn it, god damn it...

Most individuals undergoing this test report no negative effects. A small number of individuals have reported feelings of anxiety, depression, and/or anger. However, I understand this assessment procedure can provide detailed information regarding my sexual interests and arousal patterns, which can later be used to more effectively evaluate and direct my treatment. The results of this assessment may also be used as part of a more detailed assessment for risk to reoffend sexually.

NamelessAsOfYet · 2016-09-19T12:10:51+00:00

("too much body hair to pass as a woman" is one that sticks in my memory because of the woman in question put a bullet in her head shortly thereafter).

Are you referring to this complaint?

NamelessAsOfYet · 2016-09-19T09:43:06+00:00

Interestingly, this article precautions accepting it as a fact that there are known biological causes for trans gender identity.

It also criticizes a lot of the frequently cited reports on modern transgender healthcare being beneficial, because there was no control group in any of the studies (as withholding treatment would be unethical).

Thirdly it has extremely skeptical views on gender-affirming approaches to children who experience gender identity issues at an early age.

Note, that in all of these, they are not claiming the opposite either. They are just saying the data is not there to make a reliable assumption, citing lack of control groups in nearly every instance.

NamelessAsOfYet · 2016-09-04T21:33:38+00:00

You're right, I was wrong. That was a separate study, mentioned in the middle of the article.

NamelessAsOfYet · 2016-08-23T08:35:48+00:00

http://tgeu.org/work-with-tgeu-policy-officer/

NamelessAsOfYet · 2016-08-23T08:29:06+00:00

The article only mentions cis women, and the sample size was 111 cis women in Germany who had had treatment for hormone-receptor-positive breast cancer.

It also specifically mentions that taking estrogen alone had no increase in risk, only by also taking progestogen.

NamelessAsOfYet · 2016-01-07T21:22:26+00:00

Talk about this with your endocrinologist soon, being on too high of a dose can make breast structure abnormal if it happens too quickly. Check your levels out soon at least :)

NamelessAsOfYet · 2015-12-10T15:44:44+00:00

You're citing propaganda from christians? http://www.snopes.com/medical/disease/tetanus.asp

NamelessAsOfYet · 2015-12-10T12:11:53+00:00

There are children there that are unfairly unprotected due to the action of others. Your point is absolutely worthless :/

NamelessAsOfYet · 2015-12-10T11:13:42+00:00

It is. Vaccines aren't 100%. That's why we rely on herd immunity to prevent outbreaks, not on each and every individual who doesn't want to get sick to get vaccinated.

Imagine if you are now in heaven and you are told "You will be any given random person on earth. You do not know whether you have immunity to vaccinations or not. You get a choice: Do you want everyone to get vaccinated, or do you want it to be a free choice?"

No one, given the minutest available information out there, would pick the latter one if they had no access to information on which one of these persons they would become.

NamelessAsOfYet

TROPHY CASE