Gender Affirming Hysterectomies advertised by Boston CHILDREN’s Hospital

[TexasTiger 12,835]

 

Furthermore, the OP was pure trolling.  The video said nothing about circumstances in which said hysterectomy would be recommended.  

If you must get worked up about children getting hysterectomies come up with an actual case to discuss instead of a simple video about hysterectomies produced by a "Childrens Hospital".

This whole discussion is based on a hypothetical.

To clarify my position, I personally think performing a hysterectomy on a child - less than 18 - is a crazy proposition, at least for the purpose of conforming to her sexual identity. 

But I have faith in our medical system and providers not to do such a thing.  I don't feel a personal compulsion to involve myself in other people's health decisions, especially if the patient involved is 18-21.  It's really none of my business.  Nor do I think it represents a threat to our society.  I am willing to defer any necessary intervention or regulation to the medical and psychological experts and their codes of conduct.

I do have a concern that such (hypothetical) examples of such child abuse will be weaponized politically to direct prejudice toward people who are afflicted with sexual dysphoria, which we have already witnessed. 

They have, or at least had, a number of videos on various “gender affirming” surgeries. Here’s one where they say they perform double mastectomies on 15 year olds and genital surgery on 17 year olds.

Here’s a study on “gender affirming” hysterectomies performed on people ranging from 16 and up:

https://journals.lww.com/greenjournal/Abstract/2017/05001/Hysterectomy_as_Gender_Affirmation_Surgery_in.622.aspx

[TexasTiger 12,835]

 

 

Interestingly enough, there are some States that do allow marriages with parental consent to those under 16. 

Do you agree with those? See anyway that can go wrong?

[Cardin Drake 1,825]

Well, I wish they had a stock I could short. The lawsuits are going to bankrupt them in ten years.

[TexasTiger 12,835]

 

https://www.yahoo.com/entertainment/gender-dysphoria-transgender-kids-not-203152616.html

 

Try to love and understand others.  Stop trying to judge and control.

 

Another cliché instead of substantive discussion, but generally good advice. Wish you were capable of taking it. You don’t seem to give a damn about young people who are damaged for life due to medical intervention and even being sterilized at a point we know scientifically they lack the capacity to fully understand the long range implications of decisions. You’re not interested in learning about them. They don’t matter to you. Their existence is inconvenient to your narrative and biases.

You cite a “study” headed up by Jack Turban- an activist in this area who eagerly cultivates a media presence, but plays fast and loose with research methods to get to his desired ends. He’s also taken thousands of dollars from a pharmaceutical company that makes puberty blockers.

Here an Oxford researcher takes issue with his methods & conclusions in this piece:

https://figshare.com/articles/journal_contribution/Turban_et_al_s_incredible_assumptions_about_sex/20436189/1

Here a group of academics very sympathetic to his narrative saw fit to issue a public rebuke of his reckless lack of “vigor” in producing this study.

https://osf.io/preprints/socarxiv/b5z7j/

An excerpt:

"Many of the challenges that we identified are not specific to the authors but represent challenges facing all researchers, trans and cis, working in transgender health who are forced to work with suboptimal data sources that lack inclusion of transgender persons or fail to use best practices for gender identity ascertainment. However, science and public health as a tool or social justice requires methodological rigor in addition to conviction and intent. While this study was admirable, we find that the results were overinterpreted and that the theoretical and methodological shortcomings of the article run the risk of being more harmful than supportive. A more productive pursuit is the continued advocacy of methods development to ascertain gender identity, comprehensive inclusion of transgender individuals in survey design and sampling strategies, and increased funding for prospective and truly representative datasets to answer these questions with high-quality and methodologically sound research studies. In the absence or more and better data, studies like this one create methodological problems for future scientists to correct rather than allowing the science to scaffold toward a more just and equitable future for trans youth, and indeed, trans communities generally."

[TexasTiger 12,835]

Typically @icanthearyou response to substance. A cliché or an emoticon. 

[icanthearyou 4,462]

 

Another cliché instead of substantive discussion, but generally good advice. Wish you were capable of taking it. You don’t seem to give a damn about young people who are damaged for life due to medical intervention and even being sterilized at a point we know scientifically they lack the capacity to fully understand the long range implications of decisions. You’re not interested in learning about them. They don’t matter to you. Their existence is inconvenient to your narrative and biases.

You cite a “study” headed up by Jack Turban- an activist in this area who eagerly cultivates a media presence, but plays fast and loose with research methods to get to his desired ends. He’s also taken thousands of dollars from a pharmaceutical company that makes puberty blockers.

Here an Oxford researcher takes issue with his methods & conclusions in this piece:

https://figshare.com/articles/journal_contribution/Turban_et_al_s_incredible_assumptions_about_sex/20436189/1

Here a group of academics very sympathetic to his narrative saw fit to issue a public rebuke of his reckless lack of “vigor” in producing this study.

https://osf.io/preprints/socarxiv/b5z7j/

An excerpt:

"Many of the challenges that we identified are not specific to the authors but represent challenges facing all researchers, trans and cis, working in transgender health who are forced to work with suboptimal data sources that lack inclusion of transgender persons or fail to use best practices for gender identity ascertainment. However, science and public health as a tool or social justice requires methodological rigor in addition to conviction and intent. While this study was admirable, we find that the results were overinterpreted and that the theoretical and methodological shortcomings of the article run the risk of being more harmful than supportive. A more productive pursuit is the continued advocacy of methods development to ascertain gender identity, comprehensive inclusion of transgender individuals in survey design and sampling strategies, and increased funding for prospective and truly representative datasets to answer these questions with high-quality and methodologically sound research studies. In the absence or more and better data, studies like this one create methodological problems for future scientists to correct rather than allowing the science to scaffold toward a more just and equitable future for trans youth, and indeed, trans communities generally."

Your transphobic sociologist is hardly qualified to question a study done by multiple psychiatrists,,, let alone every study done that supports the idea of gender affirmation.

Your sociologist clearly has an agenda.

https://www.oxfordstudent.com/2018/10/26/transphobic-tweets-linked-to-oxford-sociology-professor/

 

"Here a group of academics very sympathetic to his narrative saw fit to issue a public rebuke of his reckless lack of “vigor” in producing this study.

https://osf.io/preprints/socarxiv/b5z7j/"

I agree with this analysis.  This is why: "Transphobia is a social contagion, and being transgender is not".  While it argues against some finer points of methodology, clearly it supports the conclusion.

 

Your personal rant is nothing more than a reflection of your emotional bias.  I do understand that.

 

[TexasTiger 12,835]

 

Your transphobic sociologist is hardly qualified to question a study done by multiple psychiatrists,,, let alone every study done that supports the idea of gender affirmation.

Your sociologist clearly has an agenda.

https://www.oxfordstudent.com/2018/10/26/transphobic-tweets-linked-to-oxford-sociology-professor/

 

"Here a group of academics very sympathetic to his narrative saw fit to issue a public rebuke of his reckless lack of “vigor” in producing this study.

https://osf.io/preprints/socarxiv/b5z7j/"

I agree with this analysis.  This is why: "Transphobia is a social contagion, and being transgender is not".  While it argues against some finer points of methodology, clearly it supports the conclusion.

 

Your personal rant is nothing more than a reflection of your emotional bias.  I do understand that.

 

It doesn’t support the conclusion nor argue with just the finer points. Your glaring bias is impeding your reading comprehension. It eviscerates the methodology. Says it does more harm than good. What they do reveal is their own opinion absent evidence. They want to get to the same place. It’s what they believe and want the evidence to show. But they admit the datasets thus far are lacking to support it. Read it again. They reveal their own bias, but at least have the scientific integrity to recognize bad methodology is bad science.

Whatever biases the sociologist holds, his article linked aligns with trans researchers critiques of Turban’s methodology— something so bad, too opposing sides concur.

[icanthearyou 4,462]

 

It doesn’t support the conclusion nor argue with just the finer points. Your glaring bias is impeding your reading comprehension. It eviscerates the methodology. Says it does more harm than good. What they do reveal is their own opinion absent evidence. They want to get to the same place. It’s what they believe and want the evidence to show. But they admit the datasets thus far are lacking to support it. Read it again. They reveal their own bias, but at least have the scientific integrity to recognize bad methodology is bad science.

I understand the paper.  It does NOT say "does more harm than good".  It says runs the risk.  It does support the overall conclusion.

Yes, data is lacking.  Yes, it will take years of real observation in order to make a true scientific case.  This is the fact that should be disclosed to all parents by professionals caring for trans youth.

Again, loving parents and highly trained professionals need to guide these teens, not you, not me, not the government.

We all, as a society, need to love, understand, and accept them.

[TexasTiger 12,835]

 

I understand the paper.  It does NOT say "does more harm than good".  It says runs the risk.  It does support the overall conclusion.

Yes, data is lacking.  Yes, it will take years of real observation in order to make a true scientific case.  This is the fact that should be disclosed to all parents by professionals caring for trans youth.

Again, loving parents and highly trained professionals need to guide these teens, not you, not me, not the government.

We all, as a society, need to love, understand, and accept them.

The condemnation is pretty unequivocal:

“In the absence or more and better data, studies like this one create methodological problems for future scientists to correct rather than allowing the science to scaffold toward a more just and equitable future for trans youth, and indeed, trans communities generally."

I’m all for loving, understanding and accepting folks who choose to transition, just not medically experimenting on children. That such a view is considered “transphobic” is absurd.
 

The FDA issued a serious warning about puberty blockers over a month ago— Turban and other activists have ignored or downplayed, as has the media. One of the drugs cited is by the company who gave  Turban money, btw.

In France, Finland, Sweden and the UK where big pharma has little sway and the politics tend to be less polarizing than the USA, the medical profession increasingly have recognized they’ve been medicalizing children based on bad or insufficient science and have changed course. First do no harm. 

[icanthearyou 4,462]

 

The condemnation is pretty unequivocal:

“In the absence or more and better data, studies like this one create methodological problems for future scientists to correct rather than allowing the science to scaffold toward a more just and equitable future for trans youth, and indeed, trans communities generally."

I’m all for loving, understanding and accepting folks who choose to transition, just not medically experimenting on children. That such a view is considered “transphobic” is absurd.
 

The FDA issued a serious warning about puberty blockers over a month ago— Turban and other activists have ignored or downplayed, as has the media. One of the drugs cited is by the company who gave  Turban money, btw.

In France, Finland, Sweden and the UK where big pharma has little sway and the politics tend to be less polarizing than the USA, the medical profession increasingly have recognized they’ve been medicalizing children based on bad or insufficient science and have changed course. First do no harm. 

I understand how you feel.

When treated correctly and honestly, there is no "experimenting ore medicalizing".

The choice should not be yours, mine, or the governments.

 

[TexasTiger 12,835]

 

I understand how you feel.

When treated correctly and honestly, there is no "experimenting ore medicalizing".

The choice should not be yours, mine, or the governments.

 

What I’m actually advocating for is the US medical establishment to be much less influenced by big pharma and activists of any stripe. Those things seem to be much more prevalent here than in other “western style democracies.” Insist on solid science. Ignore social media. 

[icanthearyou 4,462]

12 minutes ago, TexasTiger said:

What I’m actually advocating for is the US medical establishment to be much less influenced by big pharma and activists of any stripe. Those things seem to be much more prevalent here than in other “western style democracies.” Insist on solid science. Ignore social media. 

I agree.  We should ignore social media.

[AUDub 11,147]

On 8/14/2022 at 12:18 AM, TexasTiger said:

They have, or at least had, a number of videos on various “gender affirming” surgeries. Here’s one where they say they perform double mastectomies on 15 year olds and genital surgery on 17 year olds.

Here’s a study on “gender affirming” hysterectomies performed on people ranging from 16 and up:

https://journals.lww.com/greenjournal/Abstract/2017/05001/Hysterectomy_as_Gender_Affirmation_Surgery_in.622.aspx

Pretty robust requirements. Doesn't sound like something they're doing willy nilly. Top surgery requires a letter from your primary care provider and your behavioral health provider, and genital surgery requires yet another letter from another behavioral health provider given the fertility issues involved.

[TexasTiger 12,835]

6 minutes ago, AUDub said:

Pretty robust requirements. Doesn't sound like something they're doing willy nilly. Top surgery requires a letter from your primary care provider and your behavioral health provider, and genital surgery requires yet another letter from another behavioral health provider given the fertility issues involved.

We clearly define “robust” very differently. I’ve heard from numerous detransitioners how easy it was to get approvals. How many primary care physicians have expertise in this area? Or any specialized area, especially one so relatively new without great data? Any behavioral health provider? MSW? Recent master’s degree graduate? These are the most minimal requirements to CYA.

[TitanTiger 20,472]

2 hours ago, AUDub said:

Pretty robust requirements. Doesn't sound like something they're doing willy nilly. Top surgery requires a letter from your primary care provider and your behavioral health provider, and genital surgery requires yet another letter from another behavioral health provider given the fertility issues involved.

I don't think "don't do it willy nilly" should be the standard here.  There are certain things that we rightly say that minors cannot consent to, even if the ostensibly responsible adults in charge of them say it's ok.  This should be one of them.

[icanthearyou 4,462]

42 minutes ago, TitanTiger said:

I don't think "don't do it willy nilly" should be the standard here.  There are certain things that we rightly say that minors cannot consent to, even if the ostensibly responsible adults in charge of them say it's ok.  This should be one of them.

Not really, loving parents and highly trained, skilled professionals should help these teens make their decision.

Everyone should however have their eyes wide open.  The decision has consequences.

There is no political issue here. 

[TitanTiger 20,472]

1 minute ago, icanthearyou said:

Not really, loving parents and highly trained, skilled professionals should help these teens make their decision.

Everyone should however have their eyes wide open.  The decision has consequences.

There is no political issue here. 

Allowing this to be done to a child isn't loving.

And it's as much of a "political issue" as saying that minor children cannot consent to sexual activity.  Or that under a certain age they cannot consent to be married.

Only difference is, at least with those situations you can either take action to completely undo it (annulment or divorce) or it's possible to have no serious permanent health effects.  What's being proposed here is irreversible with lifetime, very serious health effects and consequences.

[icanthearyou 4,462]

9 minutes ago, TitanTiger said:

Allowing this to be done to a child isn't loving.

This is based purely on your beliefs.  You cannot prove that because,,, it's not true.

The data is far from complete but, you cannot simply refuse to acknowledge those you are happy with their choice.

I appreciate your feelings.  I do not believe your feelings are worthy of a government prohibition.

[TitanTiger 20,472]

Just now, icanthearyou said:

This is based purely on your beliefs.  You cannot prove that because,,, it's not true.

The data is far from complete but, you cannot simply refuse to acknowledge those you are happy with their choice.

I appreciate your feelings.  I do not believe your feelings are worthy of a government prohibition.

I think it's basic common sense that permanent life and health altering surgery on physically healthy children is of far more importance than whether or not children (even with parental consent) should be able to get married or consent to sex.  It's disturbing that you keep framing this as something of less importance and writing objections to it off as mere "beliefs."

[icanthearyou 4,462]

Just now, TitanTiger said:

I think it's basic common sense that permanent life and health altering surgery on physically healthy children is of far more importance than whether or not children (even with parental consent) should be able to get married or consent to sex.  It's disturbing that you keep framing this as something of less importance and writing objections to it off as mere "beliefs."

I appreciate your beliefs.  And yes,,, that is exactly what they are. 

You cannot honestly profess to know what is best for everyone.

[TitanTiger 20,472]

2 minutes ago, icanthearyou said:

I appreciate your beliefs.  And yes,,, that is exactly what they are. 

You cannot honestly profess to know what is best for everyone.

I can profess it in the same way we can profess that minor children under a certain age cannot legally consent to sexual activity and that under a certain age then cannot get married no matter what the parents' wishes are.

Unless you're proposing that these legal prohibitions and restrictions also be done away with since it's just other people "profess(ing) to know what's best for everyone."  If so, then declare that openly so we can get to the crux of the disagreement.

[icanthearyou 4,462]

2 minutes ago, TitanTiger said:

I can profess it in the same way we can profess that minor children under a certain age cannot legally consent to sexual activity and that under a certain age then cannot get married no matter what the parents' wishes are.

Unless you're proposing that these legal prohibitions and restrictions also be done away with since it's just other people "profess(ing) to know what's best for everyone."  If so, then declare that openly so we can get to the crux of the disagreement.

I thought we were already there.  Please, if you have something more, I would like to hear it.

[TitanTiger 20,472]

9 minutes ago, icanthearyou said:

I thought we were already there.  Please, if you have something more, I would like to hear it.

Since you seem to enjoy dipping and dodging behind vague platitudes and generalities, let us be clear:

Do you believe there should be no minimum age of consent for children to engage in sexual activity?  Yes or no.

Do you believe there should be no minimum age of consent for children to enter into marriage?  Yes or no.

If additional details are needed to explain your specific views on either of these, please provide them.

 

[icanthearyou 4,462]

1 minute ago, TitanTiger said:

Since you seem to enjoy dipping and dodging behind vague platitudes and generalities, let us be clear:

Do you believe there should be no minimum age of consent for children of any age to engage in sexual activity?  Yes or no.

Do you believe there should be no minimum age of consent for children of any age to enter into marriage?  Yes or no.

If additional details are needed to explain your specific views on either of these, please provide them.

 

I believe there should be a minimum age for any gender related surgical therapies. 

[TitanTiger 20,472]

3 minutes ago, icanthearyou said:

I believe there should be a minimum age for any gender related surgical therapies. 

Ok, since you're about as easy to nail down as Jello, is this just some personal belief, or like marriage and sexual activity, do you believe there should be a minimum age for all gender related surgical therapies that's actually encoded in law?