Autistic girls seeking answers ‘are seizing on sex change’

[Jarhyn]

Not to mention that not everyone can even get cheaper or less painful hair removals done. There are certain things that just can't be addressed, fixed, or altered effectively after the fact of an unwanted puberty.

Yeah. There are so many complications and considerations, compromises, difficult decisions as it is. A lot of the decision making happens far past what you want, and is deep in 'what is it even possible for me to do?' territory. Time feels like your enemy through most of it. Unsurprisingly, there are a lot of unqualified opinions on what trans people should do when wrt to medical/ social/ legal transition. They make it sound easy like flipping a switch.

The goal is to have fewer expensive, painful, difficult interventions. We will have fewer interventions if we allow access to blockers through the teens for such people.

I agree generally. Improved health outcomes are the highest priority. For instance, if a transgender girl starts puberty blockers early and goes straight to cross-sex hrt, it may limit options for vaginoplasty down the road leaving options which involve skin grafts or the use of colon tissue. In aggregate, that may still mean a reduction in difficult interventions, but it's so variable depending on individual needs. Tradeoffs at every step.

Yeah, it's just so hard. Like, give me a character select and the option I would take is... Let's just say it's more creative than Cyberpunk 2077. And depending on how far technology would allow, probably farther and weirder than anyone on these forums would be comfortable with. Maybe something Lovecraftian even.

Anyway, I could honestly, I think, pull my own trigger with nothing down there at all at this point, but I don't think that's really the direction I would go, either. Doctors certainly wouldn't take me as far as I would ask them to go even today. I'm well over 30 at this point. Time isn't my enemy because... Well, I think we as people CAN "Altered Carbon" and will achieve this in our lifetimes, assuming you live as old as that oligarch fuck who just kicked it. I don't know if I'll make it that long, or think even now that I have in any way earned such a thing. I don't know if that can possibly be earned, and that troubles me more than anything. That said, time is the enemy of us all in some ways.

So of course I am going to be an advocate for rights of self determination. Because I wish to be afforded this right. I think the only people who don't around here are those so high up on their pedestal only because they either conveniently already have what they want, or they lack the hubris and the temerity to seek it. I wonder who that makes a "soy" or a "cuck" or whatever the latest slur intended wronglu for people who don't accept the expectation that they act as a weak man's idea of a strong one.

 

[Rhea]

This topic has discussed biology and psychology more than politics. The mod team has recommended moving it to Science.

 

[Emily Lake]

Trimmed for length

Similarly, a transboy could have electrolysis to remove facial hair, albeit at great expense and usually not as permanent as we are led to believe.

Are you sure you aren't thinking of laser?

Very likely. It's good to know that electrolysis is more effective. I've acquired some really obnoxious chin hairs as I've aged, and I'd love to make them go away for good. Still pricey though. Otherwise, I would totally remove my armpit hairs for good.

These photos are over a decade apart (I believe 24/25 in the first and just shy of 38 in the second), and one is a shitty, low res selfie I snapped just now, but they do illustrate a considerable difference: after hundreds of hours of electrolysis I now have a totally different hat.

Well done, that made me giggle!

I really don't wish any of that on her, but at the same time, I do wish I had the options and resources she had available to her available to me when I was fifteen (or younger). Part of the reason I don't wish any of that on her is I've lived it. Painfully. And some of it could have been spared from me for certain.

And that's where more stringent guidelines for minors come into play. I'm not 100% opposed to transitioning minors, but I do think there should be considerably more care taken to ensure that gender dysphoria requiring transition is the most appropriate approach, and that other factors have been addressed. If a child is autistic, make sure that appropriate occupational therapy has been undergone, and that the dysphoria is genuine before proceeding. Similarly, if a minor has a history of mental health issues, make sure that those are addressed first. All of that, however, flies out the window in a self-id and affirmation-only environment.

I would love for the options to be meaningfully available to to the true positives, and to reduce the false positives as much as possible.

 

[Jarhyn]

Trimmed for length


Very likely. It's good to know that electrolysis is more effective. I've acquired some really obnoxious chin hairs as I've aged, and I'd love to make them go away for good. Still pricey though. Otherwise, I would totally remove my armpit hairs for good.

These photos are over a decade apart (I believe 24/25 in the first and just shy of 38 in the second), and one is a shitty, low res selfie I snapped just now, but they do illustrate a considerable difference: after hundreds of hours of electrolysis I now have a totally different hat.

Well done, that made me giggle!

I really don't wish any of that on her, but at the same time, I do wish I had the options and resources she had available to her available to me when I was fifteen (or younger). Part of the reason I don't wish any of that on her is I've lived it. Painfully. And some of it could have been spared from me for certain.

And that's where more stringent guidelines for minors come into play. I'm not 100% opposed to transitioning minors, but I do think there should be considerably more care taken to ensure that gender dysphoria requiring transition is the most appropriate approach, and that other factors have been addressed. If a child is autistic, make sure that appropriate occupational therapy has been undergone, and that the dysphoria is genuine before proceeding. Similarly, if a minor has a history of mental health issues, make sure that those are addressed first. All of that, however, flies out the window in a self-id and affirmation-only environment.

I would love for the options to be meaningfully available to to the true positives, and to reduce the false positives as much as possible.

And there's the rub. You are not qualified to make that call. You are an armchair non-professional who is not even themselves autistic. You have no training and no context, so I would personally ask that you please kindly quit trying to step between autistic people and their doctors.

Also, you STILL haven't answered the calculus that indicates that the effect is more likely due to a lack of cultural bias against transition than it is due to some kind of acting out as you seem to want to believe (which is incredibly patronizing by the way, and I absolutely see the irony that you are yet again trying to foist your views on gender onto the rest of us).

 

[Emily Lake]

Jarhyn, have you bothered to read through the Tavistock investigation at all?

 

[Politesse]

Jarhyn, have you bothered to read through the Tavistock investigation at all?

What about that study are you trying to highlight, exactly? Does it say that decisions should be taken out of the hands of the children, their families, and their therapists?

 

[Jarhyn]

Jarhyn, have you bothered to read through the Tavistock investigation at all?

What about that study are you trying to highlight, exactly? Does it say that decisions should be taken out of the hands of the children, their families, and their therapists?

They want to claim that when people have an open choice to transition (relative to what they wish to enforce wrt gatekeeping) more persist than do when more restrictive policies are in place. They want to claim that this implies that the difference of margins is an indicator that they are not experiencing "real" dysphoria without considering the calculus behind desistence in the restricted space.

My hypothesis is that desistence is equally a function of people now being on the far side of the horizon, now never able to achieve the results they want and so they "settle" on a lifetime of shattered dreams rather than going through the pain and dissatisfaction of an incomplete result. For the record, that reality is where I myself live, so I know it is absolutely a factor in play.

Among them also must be those who are more flexible in their self image in that they have both desires of equal extent and merely having the decision complete is sufficient for them to accept where they are.

They think that transition where, in a restricted environment desistence would result, this means no course of treatment is warranted. To which I generally say "fuck you and get bent".

We get more positive outcomes when people have a choice. Some will choose badly, but as I think you and I both would agree, that doesn't mean they shouldn't get to choose, especially with the help of people who ACTUALLY have experience in this decision and how to keep it from being made flippantly.

They essentially are busting in on doctors and professionals and individuals because in their not-doctor opinion, they know better than the doctors or persons what goals should be acceptable with respect to bodily autonomy. To which my response is also "get bent".

 

[Emily Lake]

Jarhyn, have you bothered to read through the Tavistock investigation at all?

What about that study are you trying to highlight, exactly? Does it say that decisions should be taken out of the hands of the children, their families, and their therapists?

The court's decision was that children under 16 are unable to make an informed decision with respect to puberty blockers or cross-sex hormones, and that they cannot be prescribed to children under 16 without the court's approval.

The investigation further showed that Tavistock was prescribing hormone blockers with insufficient diagnosis efforts (often after only a few hours worth of discussion), and with no follow-up or tracking. Tavistock had not been monitoring their patients with respect to the satisfaction of the outcomes of their prescriptions, nor to any side effects or risks associated with the drugs they were prescribing.

Tavistock ignored and suppressed concerns voiced by their own doctors that the approaches being pushed were essentially conversion therapy for gay children, and that other significant mental health issues were being ignored.

 

[Jarhyn]

Jarhyn, have you bothered to read through the Tavistock investigation at all?

What about that study are you trying to highlight, exactly? Does it say that decisions should be taken out of the hands of the children, their families, and their therapists?

The court's decision was that children under 16 are unable to make an informed decision with respect to puberty blockers or cross-sex hormones, and that they cannot be prescribed to children under 16 without the court's approval.

The investigation further showed that Tavistock was prescribing hormone blockers with insufficient diagnosis efforts (often after only a few hours worth of discussion), and with no follow-up or tracking. Tavistock had not been monitoring their patients with respect to the satisfaction of the outcomes of their prescriptions, nor to any side effects or risks associated with the drugs they were prescribing.

Tavistock ignored and suppressed concerns voiced by their own doctors that the approaches being pushed were essentially conversion therapy for gay children, and that other significant mental health issues were being ignored.

Ah, back to ThInK Of ThE ChIlDrEn.

The fact that some organization in the world does things badly does not speak to whether the world, generally, does things badly.

You do admit therefore that you wish to get between children, parents, and their doctors, irreversibility of puberty be damned.

Get bent.

 

[Emily Lake]

Jarhyn, have you bothered to read through the Tavistock investigation at all?

What about that study are you trying to highlight, exactly? Does it say that decisions should be taken out of the hands of the children, their families, and their therapists?

They want to claim that...

No. None of your screed has anything to do with the Tavistock investigation.

 

[Emily Lake]

The court's decision was that children under 16 are unable to make an informed decision with respect to puberty blockers or cross-sex hormones, and that they cannot be prescribed to children under 16 without the court's approval.

The investigation further showed that Tavistock was prescribing hormone blockers with insufficient diagnosis efforts (often after only a few hours worth of discussion), and with no follow-up or tracking. Tavistock had not been monitoring their patients with respect to the satisfaction of the outcomes of their prescriptions, nor to any side effects or risks associated with the drugs they were prescribing.

Tavistock ignored and suppressed concerns voiced by their own doctors that the approaches being pushed were essentially conversion therapy for gay children, and that other significant mental health issues were being ignored.

Ah, back to ThInK Of ThE ChIlDrEn.

The fact that some organization in the world does things badly does not speak to whether the world, generally, does things badly.

You do admit therefore that you wish to get between children, parents, and their doctors, irreversibility of puberty be damned.

Get bent.

Doctors are being negligent, compliments of lobbying organizations. The affirmation-only path sterilizes children.

I suppose it's nice to know that you support sterilizing children if it affirms your feelings? Or would you perhaps like to set aside a wee bit of your personal feelings about this and give consideration to the fact that not all cases should be treated the same, and that responsible and comprehensive clinical approaches with clear guidelines should be implemented so that unnecessary harm is avoided?

On the other side of things... are you a proponent of self-identification alone being the benchmark, and that no diagnosis should be required at all?

 

[Jarhyn]

The court's decision was that children under 16 are unable to make an informed decision with respect to puberty blockers or cross-sex hormones, and that they cannot be prescribed to children under 16 without the court's approval.

The investigation further showed that Tavistock was prescribing hormone blockers with insufficient diagnosis efforts (often after only a few hours worth of discussion), and with no follow-up or tracking. Tavistock had not been monitoring their patients with respect to the satisfaction of the outcomes of their prescriptions, nor to any side effects or risks associated with the drugs they were prescribing.

Tavistock ignored and suppressed concerns voiced by their own doctors that the approaches being pushed were essentially conversion therapy for gay children, and that other significant mental health issues were being ignored.

Ah, back to ThInK Of ThE ChIlDrEn.

The fact that some organization in the world does things badly does not speak to whether the world, generally, does things badly.

You do admit therefore that you wish to get between children, parents, and their doctors, irreversibility of puberty be damned.

Get bent.

Doctors are being negligent, compliments of lobbying organizations. The affirmation-only path sterilizes children.

I suppose it's nice to know that you support sterilizing children if it affirms your feelings? Or would you perhaps like to set aside a wee bit of your personal feelings about this and give consideration to the fact that not all cases should be treated the same, and that responsible and comprehensive clinical approaches with clear guidelines should be implemented so that unnecessary harm is avoided?

On the other side of things... are you a proponent of self-identification alone being the benchmark, and that no diagnosis should be required at all?

ThInK Of the ChIlDrEn!!!!11111oneoneone

You and your false goddamn dichotomies!

I support letting people do whatever they goddamn well please with their bodies and you can fuck right up out of here with that noise.

I can have a kid a lot of ways. I don't need my penis to do it. I already was born unable to have the child-producing experience I wish for fulfilled.

You and your ilk are, I suppose, also responsible for the fact that women have such a hard time seeking tubal ligation. People can literally choose, legally, to be sterilized. They do choose it. This is not even choosing sterility. It is choosing a small-ish chance of it (gnostically, I might add).

It doesn't preclude adoption.

It doesn't preclude raising children.

It doesn't even really preclude producing viable gametes for many, if not most.

Diagnosis should not be the benchmark. Rather, consultation and persistence are the most apt measures. Why? I have no "diagnosis". No "diagnosis" exists for the dysphoria I have. My end-goal isn't represented by any biology seen in any human being (or for that matter any mammal) ever born. You, perhaps even most doctors would just ask "why would you want to do that to yourself" and my response is "because I want it." The bar then should be how persistently I have wanted it, that it isn't a phase but rather a fact of my existence, a true intransigent goal. This is what mental health professionals need to be looking for: not some diagnosis, but the indicators of a serious, somber, best-informed-as-possible decision. That isn't affirmation-only. It's "in consultation with professionals". But ultimately, the decision rests with the aspirant.

 

[Emily Lake]

I have no "diagnosis". No "diagnosis" exists for the dysphoria I have. My end-goal isn't represented by any biology seen in any human being (or for that matter any mammal) ever born.

With the utmost respect and compassion, have you tried cognitive behavioral therapy?

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

With slightly less respect, but still with compassion, why should your strong internal desire to be something that you patently and objectively are not and cannot be obligate anyone else on the planet to participate in fulfilling your desire in any way?

 

[Jarhyn]

I have no "diagnosis". No "diagnosis" exists for the dysphoria I have. My end-goal isn't represented by any biology seen in any human being (or for that matter any mammal) ever born.

With the utmost respect and compassion, have you tried cognitive behavioral therapy?

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

With slightly less respect, but still with compassion, why should your strong internal desire to be something that you patently and objectively are not and cannot be obligate anyone else on the planet to participate in fulfilling your desire in any way?

With no respect at all: get bent.

Also with no respect at all: it is not "some thing I am patently and objectively not" it is rather "some shape I patently and objectively do not have" these are very different ideas, one making a declaration that the shape my body has beneath the neck defines who I am. I would disabuse you (and my own body for that matter) of that notion.

My fulfillment of my desire predicates on the idea that, given consideration, many, if not most, would gladly help others in attaining their goals of self alteration so long as there is mutual assistance offered. Something somewhere between "that's a lot of money" and "that's a really cool idea" won't obligate anyone, but will still get the job done, and hopefully make you lose your shit over the impropriety of it all.

 

[Emily Lake]

I have no "diagnosis". No "diagnosis" exists for the dysphoria I have. My end-goal isn't represented by any biology seen in any human being (or for that matter any mammal) ever born.

With the utmost respect and compassion, have you tried cognitive behavioral therapy?

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

With slightly less respect, but still with compassion, why should your strong internal desire to be something that you patently and objectively are not and cannot be obligate anyone else on the planet to participate in fulfilling your desire in any way?

With no respect at all: get bent.

Also with no respect at all: it is not "some thing I am patently and objectively not" it is rather "some shape I patently and objectively do not have" these are very different ideas, one making a declaration that the shape my body has beneath the neck defines who I am. I would disabuse you (and my own body for that matter) of that notion.

My fulfillment of my desire predicates on the idea that, given consideration, many, if not most, would gladly help others in attaining their goals of self alteration so long as there is mutual assistance offered. Something somewhere between "that's a lot of money" and "that's a really cool idea" won't obligate anyone, but will still get the job done, and hopefully make you lose your shit over the impropriety of it all.

I don't give a crap about propriety. That's not a problem. And if you want to foot the bill to make yourself look like a winged purple dinosaur with glowing green antennae, be my guest. Just don't demand that I must help you in your endeavor, and don't demand that I can't look at you funny when you walk past on the street.

Because no matter how much you can modify your body to look like a winged purple dinosaur with glowing green antennae... you are not ACTUALLY a winged purple dinosaur with glowing green antennae. You're a male human being who has gone to great lengths to acquire the veneer of a winged purple dinosaur with glowing green antennae.

Short version: sticking feathers to your ass doesn't make you a chicken.

 

[Jarhyn]

With no respect at all: get bent.

Also with no respect at all: it is not "some thing I am patently and objectively not" it is rather "some shape I patently and objectively do not have" these are very different ideas, one making a declaration that the shape my body has beneath the neck defines who I am. I would disabuse you (and my own body for that matter) of that notion.

My fulfillment of my desire predicates on the idea that, given consideration, many, if not most, would gladly help others in attaining their goals of self alteration so long as there is mutual assistance offered. Something somewhere between "that's a lot of money" and "that's a really cool idea" won't obligate anyone, but will still get the job done, and hopefully make you lose your shit over the impropriety of it all.

I don't give a crap about propriety. That's not a problem. And if you want to foot the bill to make yourself look like a winged purple dinosaur with glowing green antennae, be my guest. Just don't demand that I must help you in your endeavor, and don't demand that I can't look at you funny when you walk past on the street.

Because no matter how much you can modify your body to look like a winged purple dinosaur with glowing green antennae... you are not ACTUALLY a winged purple dinosaur with glowing green antennae. You're a male human being who has gone to great lengths to acquire the veneer of a winged purple dinosaur with glowing green antennae.

Short version: sticking feathers to your ass doesn't make you a chicken.

My demand, in point of fact, is not that you don't look at me funny. Merely that I get every right to give you the finger when you do, for being an antisocial bitch.

People will always be exactly what they are at that moment in time. There is only the text.

Short version, sticking feathers to your ass means you have a feathery ass. If the definition of chicken is "has a feathery ass" that would, in fact, make me a chicken.

You are attempting to manipulate definitions to claim that people born with penises can't satisfy any reasonable definition of woman. That is just plain ridiculous. How will you change your tune, I wonder, when people can have a full vagina, uterus, and ovaries installed? Are these people not women?

What about when someone can just drop their brain into a fully "woman" body? Will THESE people be women to your tastes?

The fact is, the important pillars about who someone is, the science of who they are, is based not in their body but on their brain and the hormones it is exposed to. You won't get away from that, that the brain is the bedrock of behavior and behavior is the bedrock of who we are.

From your political views, it seems you are trying really hard to prevent this from happening, people who have estrogen-only puberties, upbringings, and social circles focused on their own womanliness in the presence of feminine predispositioning

 

[Emily Lake]

Short version, sticking feathers to your ass means you have a feathery ass. If the definition of chicken is "has a feathery ass" that would, in fact, make me a chicken.

Sure, *if* that's the definition of a chicken. Unfortunately, that's NOT the definition of a chicken, so... I'm not sure where that leaves you.

You are attempting to manipulate definitions to claim that people born with penises can't satisfy any reasonable definition of woman.

I'm not manipulating definitions at all. I'm using the same definition that has been used throughout human history.

That is just plain ridiculous. How will you change your tune, I wonder, when people can have a full vagina, uterus, and ovaries installed? Are these people not women?

What about when someone can just drop their brain into a fully "woman" body? Will THESE people be women to your tastes?

When that happens, then I will very likely change my view. At the moment, however, that's not a possibility. I mean, at some point in the future when (if) humans can magically implant their brains into giraffes, I'll also have to change my view on what a giraffe is as well as what a human is. I'll get back to you then.

The fact is, the important pillars about who someone is, the science of who they are, is based not in their body but on their brain and the hormones it is exposed to. You won't get away from that, that the brain is the bedrock of behavior and behavior is the bedrock of who we are.

From your political views, it seems you are trying really hard to prevent this from happening, people who have estrogen-only puberties, upbringings, and social circles focused on their own womanliness in the presence of feminine predispositioning

You're the one trying to define "woman" based on a set of regressive stereotyped behaviors.

 

[repoman]

With no respect at all: get bent.

Also with no respect at all: it is not "some thing I am patently and objectively not" it is rather "some shape I patently and objectively do not have" these are very different ideas, one making a declaration that the shape my body has beneath the neck defines who I am. I would disabuse you (and my own body for that matter) of that notion.

My fulfillment of my desire predicates on the idea that, given consideration, many, if not most, would gladly help others in attaining their goals of self alteration so long as there is mutual assistance offered. Something somewhere between "that's a lot of money" and "that's a really cool idea" won't obligate anyone, but will still get the job done, and hopefully make you lose your shit over the impropriety of it all.

I don't give a crap about propriety. That's not a problem. And if you want to foot the bill to make yourself look like a winged purple dinosaur with glowing green antennae, be my guest. Just don't demand that I must help you in your endeavor, and don't demand that I can't look at you funny when you walk past on the street.

Because no matter how much you can modify your body to look like a winged purple dinosaur with glowing green antennae... you are not ACTUALLY a winged purple dinosaur with glowing green antennae. You're a male human being who has gone to great lengths to acquire the veneer of a winged purple dinosaur with glowing green antennae.

Short version: sticking feathers to your ass doesn't make you a chicken.

My demand, in point of fact, is not that you don't look at me funny. Merely that I get every right to give you the finger when you do, for being an antisocial bitch.

People will always be exactly what they are at that moment in time. There is only the text.

Short version, sticking feathers to your ass means you have a feathery ass. If the definition of chicken is "has a feathery ass" that would, in fact, make me a chicken.

You are attempting to manipulate definitions to claim that people born with penises can't satisfy any reasonable definition of woman. That is just plain ridiculous. How will you change your tune, I wonder, when people can have a full vagina, uterus, and ovaries installed? Are these people not women?

What about when someone can just drop their brain into a fully "woman" body? Will THESE people be women to your tastes?

The fact is, the important pillars about who someone is, the science of who they are, is based not in their body but on their brain and the hormones it is exposed to. You won't get away from that, that the brain is the bedrock of behavior and behavior is the bedrock of who we are.

From your political views, it seems you are trying really hard to prevent this from happening, people who have estrogen-only puberties, upbringings, and social circles focused on their own womanliness in the presence of feminine predispositioning

Is the juice worth the squeeze when (if) we get to this level of technology? I would pity the child born to an XY natal male who had ovary transplants.

 

[Jarhyn]

My demand, in point of fact, is not that you don't look at me funny. Merely that I get every right to give you the finger when you do, for being an antisocial bitch.

People will always be exactly what they are at that moment in time. There is only the text.

Short version, sticking feathers to your ass means you have a feathery ass. If the definition of chicken is "has a feathery ass" that would, in fact, make me a chicken.

You are attempting to manipulate definitions to claim that people born with penises can't satisfy any reasonable definition of woman. That is just plain ridiculous. How will you change your tune, I wonder, when people can have a full vagina, uterus, and ovaries installed? Are these people not women?

What about when someone can just drop their brain into a fully "woman" body? Will THESE people be women to your tastes?

The fact is, the important pillars about who someone is, the science of who they are, is based not in their body but on their brain and the hormones it is exposed to. You won't get away from that, that the brain is the bedrock of behavior and behavior is the bedrock of who we are.

From your political views, it seems you are trying really hard to prevent this from happening, people who have estrogen-only puberties, upbringings, and social circles focused on their own womanliness in the presence of feminine predispositioning

Is the juice worth the squeeze when (if) we get to this level of technology? I would pity the child born to an XY natal male who had ovary transplants.

See, there it is. You just create a new distinction even deeper beyond the privacy wall so you can continue to other them and call them "male". Now not only do you forcibly pry into their pants, you pry into their private medical history.

It doesn't matter what you think is "worth it". You still haven't answered any of my questions.

 

[Emily Lake]

See, there it is. You just create a new distinction even deeper beyond the privacy wall so you can continue to other them and call them "male". Now not only do you forcibly pry into their pants, you pry into their private medical history.

It doesn't matter what you think is "worth it". You still haven't answered any of my questions.

This is baffling to me, Jarhyn. They are actually male, that's not in contention is it?

You know that sex is a real thing, don't you? It's not made up or socially constructed, you get that, right?