Moderating:
That looked like a quote, but it’s not. You’ve written your own summary. And you’ve inserted a term which many find offensive, “transsexualism”. The article uses the terms trans gender and gender diverse, which are more appropriate. When you are talking about emotionally charged issues that you don’t know a lot about, it’s best to stick with the language others use. Please do so for this topic going forwards.
Thanks.
Suppose a study found that orphans in foster care, or who are adopted, are less likely to graduate from high school than non orphans. Would you lay blame on the foster care or adoption, and conclude that we should just leave the orphans on the street? Or would you blame it on their additional vulnerability as children who lost their parents, and instead conclude they need additional protections?
I’d hazard a guess of approximately 0.0000%
This is not some snap decision that people make impulsively.
Not sure I agree with this statement.
It’s non-zero, but no one is willing to study detransitioners out of fear that their research can be misrepresented by anti-trans politicians.
It is known that gender confirming surgeries have the lowest rate of regret of any elective surgery (0.3% in one study, vs 6-30% for knee replacement surgery, and knee replacements tends to do better than weight loss surgeries)
I’ve seen estimates that of people who do only hormones, on the order of 80% stay on them, 18-19% come off b/c of family pressure, and 1-2% detransition out of actual personal regret.
I was up late the other night at an LGBTQ+ meeting, discussing the agenda for global domination. The topics discussed were:
Better watch out.
And “detransitioned” doesn’t automatically mean the transition was a mistake. I know someone who detransitioned. At least, they decided they weren’t male but non-binary, and had laser removal of all the hair that grew in when they had been on testosterone. I don’t think they regretted having medically transitioned. I think they felt it was a step on the road to progress.
Excuse me, I did no such thing. That is the exact wording of the conclusion of the article.
It would have been easy enough to google the phrase and find out rather than accuse me.
So in your original.post you cited a different article than the one you quoted. Easy misunderstanding.
And perhaps the terminology has changed. Lonliness article was published 2023. Surgery follow-up published 2011.
Good info. Thanks!
Moderating:
I read the article you linked.
Ah, I was supposed to figure that out? Also, thanks, @SteveGrondin
Yeah, in 2011 “transsexualism” was still somewhat commonly used. It really isn’t any longer, not in publications and chat sites that aim to be polite to the people you are describing. My mod note stands. I am asking you as a mod to stop using that word, and also recommending to you, as a human being, that when you talk about emotionally charged subjects that you don’t know much about you should be very careful with your language.
No, only in hindsight when i read second article Klaymen posted. I was also confused by not finding the quote in the cited article. It did seem out of character for K to make stuff up, and his surprise at your accusation makes sense given what he thought he posted, but he could also see your moderation made sense given what he actually posted.
Yeah, I’m a little confused. Klayman did you mean to post both studies?
Anyway, they both suffer from the same issue-- no experimental control. And I’m glad you came to us with the question rather than just assume it was meaningful.
It certainly didn’t sound like his “voice”, which is why I thought it was a quote, and was surprised to see it was very different from anything in the article he cited.
I think most people are familiar with long past psychological/medical literature terms for cognitive impairment being no longer considered polite, but the term you mentioned falling out of favor is much newer. It is certainly fine to insist on non-pejorative terms being used, but also an opportunity for education. It certainly sounded more medical than slang alternatives at least.
Unfortunately for research, it’s the sort of thing where you can’t ethically do a controlled study. Hey person with gender disphoria/cancer/heart disease: we are going to randomly assign you to either get a treatment that we think will help, or to do nothing. Then follow you for 5 years and see if you are still alive.
That was my intention with that mod note. It wasn’t a formal warning or anything.
Yeah, I wish we did anyway. I want more science!
Yeah, the suicide rates of untreated people with gender disphoria are so high that it would be crazy unethical to do that. I suppose the sort of study you could do would be to have one branch do sex reassignment and the other do something that you realistically hoped would do as much good, and do informed consent up the wazoo. I’m not sure what might qualify for that other branch, though.