3 ms·
This whole second paragraph is FUD, as should be obvious from the phasing "irrevocable harm to their bodies". Dismissal as a "social phenomenon" is naive in the
by jdashg 6y ago
This whole second paragraph is FUD, as should be obvious from the phasing "irrevocable harm to their bodies". Dismissal as a "social phenomenon" is naive in the extreme, as is the author's revealed ignorance of mainstream medicine's approach to transgender minors.
- 0xy 6y agoActually, there's evidence some of the hormone blocking drugs given to children are not reversible and have serious side effects in some cases, including the loss of bone density. [1] It's my understanding that multiple studies have affirmed this. So your claim of FUD is unfounded in this case. [1] https://www.bmj.com/content/366/bmj.l5647/rr-0 https://www.bmj.com/content/366/bmj.l5647/rr-0
- newen 6y agoIf they want to transition back, they can’t do it fully since they won’t be able to have children anymore. So technically it is irrevocable harm to their bodies.
- eloff 6y agoYou think taking male hormones as a teenage girl is harmless - you know it can make them sterile right? How about a radical double mastectomy? This has real, irreversible effects. Shame on the adults for pushing parents or forcing parents to accept this, and shame on you for dismissing my very valid concerns as FUD.
- jdashg 6y agoThe mainstream approach is blockers not HRT.