4 ms·

Not really understanding you. Are you softly still saying, as someone who isn't them, that you want to gatekeep this from people who don't feel comfortable in t

Not really understanding you. Are you softly still saying, as someone who isn't them, that you want to gatekeep this from people who don't feel comfortable in their own bodies?

AlexandrB 3mo ago
We do it all the time with people who believe they should be amputees. https://my.clevelandclinic.org/health/diseases/body-integrity-identity-disorder-biid https://my.clevelandclinic.org/health/diseases/body-integrit...
- summermusic 3mo ago
  > We do it all the time No, we don't. Your linked source literally says that surgeons and providers won't perform these amputations.
  - AlexandrB 3mo ago
    I mean we gatekeep major body alterations.
    - fallal 3mo ago
      And also no child is getting their arms chopped off because they say they don't want arms.
- HedonicEscal8r 3mo ago
  Which is also wrong. People living with BIID are (usually) not irrational. The small percentage that do seek amputation have usually exhausted all treatment options, and find that amputation improves their quality of life.
  - rootusrootus 3mo ago
    We should let them, if they are of sound mind and capable of consenting. Part of that means they are not a minor.
    - HedonicEscal8r 3mo ago
      I agree that you should almost never offer amputations for BIID in minors, since delaying until adulthood would only risk a couple of years of distress and would not cause additional permanent harm.
    - pseudalopex 3mo ago
      Most developed countries allow minors to make medical decisions from an age or if enough mature.
  - slowmovintarget 3mo ago
    > People living with BIID are (usually) not irrational. This statement seems to be incorrect by definition. Do you mean, not otherwise irrational?
- alexgieg 3mo ago
  Puberty blockers aren't amputations; they're reversible medication-based treatments. Amputation can only be opted for after the transgender individual reaches adulthood. The right-wing sociopathic influencers and politicians you opted to listen to know this perfectly well. They actively chose to lie about it and to stoke rage and fear, lest they lose followers, influence, money, and power.
sail2boat3 3mo ago
I'm not sure what you're trying to say by - "isn't them" If I did undergo that path when I wanted to, at which point would you consider me "becoming them"? At the inception of the thought? After some rumination? After making the decision? After first time taking meds? After undergoing surgery? I don't consider it gatekeeping, rather prevention of making an irreversible choice while the frontal lobe is still far from knowing even what path it wants for itself for the rest of its life. I know that might be seen as unfair to a lot of people, but given the persistence with which gender affirmation is being pushed, I feel that cases like me are simply considered collateral damage. Really glad I didn't end up as such.
- pseudalopex 3mo ago
  > I don't consider it gatekeeping, rather prevention of making an irreversible choice while the frontal lobe is still far from knowing even what path it wants for itself for the rest of its life. To control access is gate keeping. Puberty blockers' effects are reversible generally. Puberty's effects are not. Gender affirming care regret rates are very low. > I know that might be seen as unfair to a lot of people, but given the persistence with which gender affirmation is being pushed, I feel that cases like me are simply considered collateral damage. Access to gender affirming care is pushed persistently because denial of gender affirming care was and is pushed persistently. And the benefits are significant. And regret rates are very low. Do you understand that no regretted treatment would require no treatment? What ratio of regretted treatment and regretted non treatment would you consider fair?
  - sail2boat3 3mo ago
    I guess things like these are one of the pillars of the division on the topic. You're trying to figure out a decent ratio, and I'd like the total number of regretted treatments to become a permanent flat zero. A child brought into this world learns from those who have walked on it for much much longer. It puts TRUST into them. The moment you have a single regretted treatment, that moment you have a human life who got failed by everyone around them. The social system, the government system, the family system. Systematically encouraging things where a regretted treatment can very well mean a life destroyed is not something I can ever support. One's perception that life dealt them inadequate set of cards should never result in a borderline-militant push for a systemic change that reduces regretted treatments to a ratio number.

Not really understanding you. Are you softly still saying, as someone who isn't them, that you want to gatekeep this from people who don't feel comfortable in their own bodies?

AlexandrB 3mo ago

We do it all the time with people who believe they should be amputees. https://my.clevelandclinic.org/health/diseases/body-integrity-identity-disorder-biid https://my.clevelandclinic.org/health/diseases/body-integrit...

summermusic 3mo ago
> We do it all the time No, we don't. Your linked source literally says that surgeons and providers won't perform these amputations.
- AlexandrB 3mo ago
  I mean we gatekeep major body alterations.
  - fallal 3mo ago
    And also no child is getting their arms chopped off because they say they don't want arms.
HedonicEscal8r 3mo ago
Which is also wrong. People living with BIID are (usually) not irrational. The small percentage that do seek amputation have usually exhausted all treatment options, and find that amputation improves their quality of life.
- rootusrootus 3mo ago
  We should let them, if they are of sound mind and capable of consenting. Part of that means they are not a minor.
  - HedonicEscal8r 3mo ago
    I agree that you should almost never offer amputations for BIID in minors, since delaying until adulthood would only risk a couple of years of distress and would not cause additional permanent harm.
  - pseudalopex 3mo ago
    Most developed countries allow minors to make medical decisions from an age or if enough mature.
- slowmovintarget 3mo ago
  > People living with BIID are (usually) not irrational. This statement seems to be incorrect by definition. Do you mean, not otherwise irrational?
alexgieg 3mo ago
Puberty blockers aren't amputations; they're reversible medication-based treatments. Amputation can only be opted for after the transgender individual reaches adulthood. The right-wing sociopathic influencers and politicians you opted to listen to know this perfectly well. They actively chose to lie about it and to stoke rage and fear, lest they lose followers, influence, money, and power.

sail2boat3 3mo ago

I'm not sure what you're trying to say by - "isn't them" If I did undergo that path when I wanted to, at which point would you consider me "becoming them"? At the inception of the thought? After some rumination? After making the decision? After first time taking meds? After undergoing surgery? I don't consider it gatekeeping, rather prevention of making an irreversible choice while the frontal lobe is still far from knowing even what path it wants for itself for the rest of its life. I know that might be seen as unfair to a lot of people, but given the persistence with which gender affirmation is being pushed, I feel that cases like me are simply considered collateral damage. Really glad I didn't end up as such.

pseudalopex 3mo ago
> I don't consider it gatekeeping, rather prevention of making an irreversible choice while the frontal lobe is still far from knowing even what path it wants for itself for the rest of its life. To control access is gate keeping. Puberty blockers' effects are reversible generally. Puberty's effects are not. Gender affirming care regret rates are very low. > I know that might be seen as unfair to a lot of people, but given the persistence with which gender affirmation is being pushed, I feel that cases like me are simply considered collateral damage. Access to gender affirming care is pushed persistently because denial of gender affirming care was and is pushed persistently. And the benefits are significant. And regret rates are very low. Do you understand that no regretted treatment would require no treatment? What ratio of regretted treatment and regretted non treatment would you consider fair?
- sail2boat3 3mo ago
  I guess things like these are one of the pillars of the division on the topic. You're trying to figure out a decent ratio, and I'd like the total number of regretted treatments to become a permanent flat zero. A child brought into this world learns from those who have walked on it for much much longer. It puts TRUST into them. The moment you have a single regretted treatment, that moment you have a human life who got failed by everyone around them. The social system, the government system, the family system. Systematically encouraging things where a regretted treatment can very well mean a life destroyed is not something I can ever support. One's perception that life dealt them inadequate set of cards should never result in a borderline-militant push for a systemic change that reduces regretted treatments to a ratio number.