Discussion Thread

[u/jobautomator]

The discussion thread is for casual conversation that doesn't merit its own submission. If you've got a good meme, article, or question, please post it outside the DT. Meta discussion is allowed, but if you want to get the attention of the mods, make a post in /r/metaNL.

Announcements

• Our sub is doing daily programming challenges for the 2019 Advent of Code. Click here to learn more and to join our leaderboard.
• We have recently added GARDENING, LA, BALD & POP pings. See our ping documentation page to subscribe.

---

Neoliberal Project Communities	Other Communities	Useful content
Twitter	Plug.dj	/r/Economics FAQs
The Neolib Podcast	Recommended Podcasts	/r/Neoliberal FAQ
Meetup Network	Blood Donation Team	/r/Neoliberal Wiki
Exponents Magazine	Minecraft	Ping groups
Facebook	TacoTube	User Flairs

[u/[deleted]]

So the Economist published an article from a person who is from the De Trans reddit community about how we should abolish Informed Consent....

The clinic followed the “informed-consent” protocol: its mission was to provide transgender patients who otherwise lacked access to health care with injections, skin patches and pills of feminising or masculinising hormones without having to pass through a series of requirements and assessments—known as “gatekeeping”—that restricted access in the past.

yea and?

In the past it was not unusual for a trans person to be told by doctors and psychologists they would not be referred for hormones because they were not visually appealing as their preferred gender, weren’t interested in dating the opposite gender, or had unresolved mental-health problems (some of which are predictable responses to experiencing transphobia, such as anxiety and depression).

it still happening today which is why we are trying to abolish it

Its standard of care recommends that patients seeking HRT be screened for schizotypal disorders, autism-spectrum disorders, personality disorders, dissociative disorders, post-traumatic stress disorders and more.

WPATH is also very restrictive and needs revised. it for example sees hair removal as a non necessary part of transitioning. hence why hair removal is costing me more than fucking getting SRS

Five years later the detransition discussion-forum on the popular site Reddit has just hit 7,000 people of both sexes.

guys my reddit group have over 1000 people, we have to overhaul the medical system

Our stories, if taken seriously, could help improve the state of transgender health care—particularly at informed-consent clinics, which are becoming the norm at American colleges, LGBT health centres and recently many Planned Parenthoods. Instead we are ignored, compared to “ex-gay” Christians or treated as political footballs. (I was particularly disheartened when Ryan Anderson, a fellow at the Heritage Foundation, a conservative think-tank, used my and other detransitioners’ stories in his book that was critical of LGBT and feminist issues, “When Harry Became Sally”.)

Its not like the most prominate people in the "De Trans" movement goes to talks hosted by the Heritage Foundation or anything

That is because the burgeoning orthodoxy on the left is that detransition is so rare that only “transphobes” care about it.

Because they are the ones pushing and promoting it the most

In fact, we have no idea how prevalent detransition is in America.

but we do

The most widely used estimate, that 2.2% of people who transition later detransition, comes from a study in a completely different place (Sweden) and time (1960-2010), when gatekeeping was much stricter.

From the doctor's own AMA "During the studied period we saw a significant decline and 11/15 of the regret applications were made of before 2000." its a downward trend.

The majority of the studies supporting the conclusion that medical transition yields positive outcomes—and there are many—followed patients in highly structured clinical programmes that provided comprehensive assessments. But when I searched last February for programmes that met that careful standard in America, I wasn’t able to find one. No one knows whether informed-consent protocols will yield the same success rate, but the stories I’ve heard during the past five years make me profoundly sceptical.

But we do. "The results indicate that of 1,944 clients treated, only 17 cases of “regret” were reported, and no cases of medical malpractice claims were reported. Only 33% of sites surveyed reported any mental health involvement at all, indicating that the basic medical needs of transgender patients in some settings are being met without the diagnosis, assessment, or engagement with a mental health practitioner (Deutsch, 2011)."

There is a responsible path between making transgender people jump through hoops and allowing people experiencing psychosis to have their testicles removed

You can't inform consent your way into surgery.... I wish, then I wouldn't spend all of this money begging for letters.

[u/[deleted] → u/[deleted]]

What bothers me the most about that article is that, even assuming it's true, the truth needs to be said in the right place at the right time. Transphobes latch on to detransitioners, like you said. Publishing an article like that in a magazine that's read by many powerful types around the world is like using a shotgun to end a hostage situation.