Paediatric Gender Experimentation is Wrong
gender affirming care is cruel + unusual torment not health care
Gender Affirming Care :: Definition :: Gender Affirming Care includes social, psychological, medical and surgical interventions in support of the way a person feels about their reproductive class. It includes pronouns and name change and people affirming those, it includes hormone therapy and it also includes body modification surgery. Gender Affirming Care involves a complete submission to the patient’s will and whim and it involves dispensing with the medical assessment model of differential diagnoses. Gender Affirming Care demands clinicians dispense with all they know about trauma care, DBT + suicidal threats, personality disorders, as well as dissociative disorders and follow the patient’s desire to modify themselves to become the opposite sex.
Here are the facts that the mainstream media and your government and your doctor and your counsellor and your therapist and your public education system refuse to tell you. This is your child, you are responsible, not any teacher or guidance counsellor or trans activists online. You made this child, you chose to have and keep this child — it is up to you to equip yourself to your utmost ability to keep that child safe and free from predators and those who would harm your child and see to it that they make it to adulthood intact and unharmed.
Gender Affirming Care is experimental, it increases the likelihood of self harm, depression, and suicidal behaviour. Lupron has a lengthy track record of iatrogenic harm.
Misconception 1:: Gender dysphoria is not a psychiatric problem that psychoanalysis can remedy — Body dissatisfaction is the root cause of gender dysphoria, Gender Affirmationists claim that it cannot be relieved by any other means except puberty blockers and a cross hormones and experimental surgery. The evidence they cite does not prove that puberty blockers reduce suicidal behaviour. What the Turban study proves is that the cohort of children receiving Gender Dysphoria labels have a higher rate of suicidal behaviour than the average population. What the Tordoff study proves is that you can torture a data set to produce results that support your hypothesis. No evidence exists to prove that puberty blockers are safe for kids or that they save lives by reducing suicidal behaviour.
Misconception 2 :: Gender dysphoria is not a phase or a social contagion, desistance is rare, most cases persist beyond childhood and therefore require treatment — Gender Dysphoria is the name a bunch of suits with scrotums receiving kickbacks from pharmaceutical companies gave puberty angst to manipulate parents into drugging their children, as part of the corporate and statist siege against childhood. Notice how humanity had never heard of Gender Dysphoria before the internet and Tumblr culture? Interesting how, unlike the discovery of Insulin, there hasn’t been a dramatic change in child mortality as a result of the desperately fabulous life-saving treatment. The Olson study demonstrates the power of social transitioning and does not explain the reason for the explosion in the paediatric gender clinic numbers across America, nor does it disprove the Littman study on ROGD.
Misconception 3: There is no such thing as too young to give children puberty suppression and cross sex hormones — GnRH agonists are not approved anywhere on the planet to delay puberty in kids with Gender Dysphoria or any kind of psychological or body dysphoria disorder. No valid and reliable evidence in existence supports the Gender Affirming Care model. Puberty has a development and neuro-physiologic purpose! Puberty is a human right, a necessity for all kids to experience in order to grow into healthy + resilient adults. Sexual function and experiences are integral components of human existence. To deprive a child of sexuality for life meets the criteria for cruel and unusual punishment. It is a deeply invasive and authoritarian act.
Misconception 4: Children and Teens are not undergoing sex re-assignment surgery — This is a lie, yes they are, they are testifying before various committees hearings across America to ban Gender Affirming Care for minors. Several young women have testified that doctors coerced them and their parents with suicide threats in order to obtain consent to perform a unnecessary double mastectomy when they were 15 years old.
Misconception 5: Gender Affirming Care is Safe and Not Experimental — Yes it is unsafe and experimental by definition. The FDA has not approved GnRH agonist for the treatment of children with gender dysphoria or any gender identity issues. This is a highly experimental treatment, on the level of Mengelian experimentation. Puberty suppression is unsafe. It is a grave, grave falsehood, it is fraudulent in fact, for any clinical researcher or clinician or doctor to suggest that GnRH agonists aka puberty blockers, are safe + reversible and without adverse effect. I have shown proof positive of this here. Not to mention that exogenous sex hormones have a definite profile of adverse side effects and medical risks, which is why menopausal women struggle to receive appropriate HRT for their physiologic condition of depleted sex hormones caused by menopause. Furthermore cross sex hormones have an adverse effect on hepatic and metabolic health, particularly in female trans-identified people.
Misconception 6: Puberty Blockers and Hormones given to children do not cause infertility — False — it misleads people to make such a claim with certitude. McNamara et al falsely claim that when stopped, the effects of puberty blockers are fully reversible and sexual development catches up to chronological age quickly. Gender Affirmationists frequently cite Dutch studies as their evidence, a logical flaw because the cohort from the Dutch study does not match up with the cohort of young people presently demanding GAC across North America. McNamara et al engage in the same kind of misleading discourse as they did under Misconception 4, initial denial followed by partial admission. Exogenous sex hormones may affect fertility the paragraph ends.
Misconception 7: Gender Affirming Care does not increase the risk of suicide, Gender Affirming Care reduces suicidal behaviour — Correlation is not causation. Gender Affirmationists commit the same statistical misinterpretation of data again and again. It is deeply irresponsible to attribute suicide to a single cause. LBGT Movement Advancement Project developed a guide about Suicide + LGBT (see below to access a copy), DON'T attribute a suicide death to a single factor (such as bullying or discrimination) or say that a specific anti-LGBT law or policy will "cause" suicide, recommendation 7 begins. It is a form of collective psychological abuse to weaponised child suicide to promote an experimental model of medical care. It is deeply abusive to parents to emotionally blackmail them with the death of their child to coerce them to agree to a treatment option — that is not consent that is coercion. It is deeply irresponsible to incept the idea into a child’s mind that they can claim suicidality to receive the treatment regime which they believe will give them what they think they want. In a recording of Wallace Wong speaking at the Vancouver Public Library in February of 2019, he can be heard coaching parents to report suicidal ideation in order to get hormones and blockers.
Misconception 8: Children do not provide consent, treatment decisions are collaborative between clinicians, parents, and the child — McNamara et al again oversimplify the reality and minimise the gravity of the situation and fail to address the actual concern. Can children consent to pubertal suppression? Can parents? What gives the parent a right to stop a child’s growth for improper medical indication for a thing that trusted and valid and reliable science and thousands of years of human history says is a phase? The UK High Court ruled that children could not consent to puberty suppression and even though the Appellate Court overturned that ruling, Keira Bell won a victory, Tavistock closed and a review of GIDS ordered, which is still underway. You can access the full ruling below. A feature on Transgender Youth by Reuters reported that families did feel coerced into transitioning their children.
Misconception 9: Gender Identity is not a social contagion, children freely choose to seek GAC without external influences — Again, McNamara et al refusing to engage with reality, this is more magical thinking from Gender Affirmationists. Reality simply does not support this claim. Lisa Littman’s paper and the clinical reality of detransitioners and families on the ground disproves this. Detransitioners all report a social contagion factor, many report coercive control tactics from a gender affirming peer group, they report alienation manipulation to draw young people away from families.
PDF References Below
