‘I literally lost organs:’ Why detransitioned teens regret changing genders

[Phys251]

10% don't deserve happiness,

What the ****? How can you say that as a trans person? Why do you want to pull up the ladder from under you?

it's okay, the narrative is out there and no how many studies, or personal stories, or hundreds to thousands speak out, you have that 90% study and the MESSAGE.

 

[Phys251]

I said it once, and i'll say it again: Minors should not be subjected to life-altering, irreversible transgender surgical procedures & not given hormone blockers when their effects on minors are still under scrutiny. It is not transphobic, despite what some say. It is common sense. If they are having "identity issues", then parents should invest in shrinks until their kid is over the age of 18 and is 100% sure he/she wants to cut certain parts off or whatever.

This is exactly the kind of bovine feces that was for decades forced onto gay youth. Homophobia is being rebranded as transphobia with very few changes other than the targets of the hate.

 

[Mina]

because it removes organs and destroys reproductive systems that aren't causing any issues with health it's doing harm when it's unnecessary the basic for ethics is first Do no harm.

Those systems are causing issues, though, for those who want them removed. They are causing severe psychological distress.

How can you think it's the slightest bit ethical to put your people like this when they're 15 years old?

I haven't taken any position on whether such interventions are appropriate at that age. I'm just looking for data on which to base that position. How common is it for someone who is 15, and has wanted to transition consistently from age 12, to later regret transitioning? I'd think that would be a key question we'd want answered when making a decision. If it's common, better to wait, even knowing we're going to be causing a lot of distress to those who want to transition but are denied that. But what if it's the medical equivalent of someone who dies of a severe allergic reaction to a common antibiotic that was prescribed for an infection? Such freak cases do happen, and we don't deny people antibiotics out of fear of that exceedingly rare risk. We play the odds. That's what I'd want to see here: even if there's a risk of someone later regretting a transition, if that is very rare and significantly outweighed by, say, excess suicides associated with denying such people transition, then we'd be doing more harm than good denying it. I'd want to know more about the numbers before taking a position on that.

so you think the only place where you find detrans people is on Reddit

No. I never said anything of the sort, yet it's a position you're eager to attribute to me. That's a classic straw-man attack.

I dated a guy years ago that had started transitioning and then he stopped was that just on Reddit?

Well, you're just on Debatepolitics.com. I have no way of knowing whether that's true, or whether you're just one of those people who conveniently has whatever personal life experience is necessary to argue a view. I could as easily tell you that I dated a guy years ago who wanted to transition, but was told he had to wait until he was 18, and so he killed himself. You'd have no way of knowing if I just made up that life experience for purposes of arguing a point.

Is there a world where you think that it's at that go to intentionally cripple somebody you have a clue at ethics are?

That was gibberish.

Anyway, I'm not arguing nobody exists in the real world who has transitioned and later regrets it. I'm sure there are such people. Humans are full of regrets. Similarly, there are people who regret having children, but we wouldn't respond by denying people the right to have children, in order to prevent such rare cases. People also regret all sorts of elective surgeries and life choices. People with, say, heart disease, may regret a lifetime of eating meat, but we don't respond by denying people the right to eat meat. People regret going to college, but we don't outlaw going to college. I know several people who regret voting for Trump. Our usual approach is to accept some people are going to regret just about any choice you allow them to make, without that meaning they should be denied that option.

 

[Mina]

so apparently we need to butcher some more people to get you the data you need to be convinced that butchering people is not good.

I haven't called for butchering anyone.

I'm not sure there needs to be too much research done on it why not let's error on the side of first Do no harm so chemically castrating children and then chopping them up probably shouldn't happen unless we're absolutely certain that it needs to.

The question of what does greater harm is exactly the question we're discussing. If you do more harm by postponing transition than you do by not postponing it, then it would be unethical to postpone it.

This rational reasonable well-guided approach doesn't take any studies all it takes is using your brain for more than just keeping your ears from violently slamming together.

Let's be honest: this isn't about the right wanting "rational, reasonable, and well-guided" approaches. It's the latest front in their never-ending culture war. Those howling against gender transitions are, for the most part, the same people who spent their days howling against marriage equality until they definitively lost that fight. And they're the same kinds of people who once howled against women in the workforce, or racial integration. Three's also huge overlap with those who howl against immigration. They don't like cultural change. For my part, I'm neutral on it, and will remain that way until I have better data on which to form an opinion.

we definitely will have data in the future of how unethical unethical behavior is and maybe then it will convince you we shouldn't be castrating children but I don't know why you need that sort of thing. Sounds like kind of thing Joseph mangala would do.

We will have data in the future, but neither of us knows what it will say. For the sake of argument, though, imagine that it says that those who transitioned only later regretted it in one out of 100 cases, while those who were forced to delay transition until adulthood had enough of an increased risk of suicide that it effectively killed 50 out of 100 of them. Would that change your view on the question? It would change mine. Then I'd be in favor of earlier transitions for those with consistently established desires for it. For now, though, I don't know the data, so I'm neutral.

Also, no, it doesn't sound at all like something Josef Mengele would do (assuming that's who you meant to reference). He wasn't famous for giving people medical treatments that they came to him begging for, with the hope that it would make their lives better. He was famous for inflicting sadistic experiments on prisoners who had no say in the matter, with the hope that it would yield insights that might later help the master race. If you want an historical analogy, it's more like, say, early Polio vaccines for kids. In some cases, those ended up harming people. One bad batch of the vaccine famously gave 250 people polio. But the doctors doing that weren't experimenting on prisoners to learn more that could help others the doctors cared about. The doctors were trying to save those kids. That's what we're talking about with doctors using medical means to help people transition, in the hopes of helping them deal better with gender dysphoria. It may or may not wind up being the right call, and regardless, it will surely have some individuals for whom it doesn't work out well (just like those vaccines). But it's nothing at all like what happened with Mengele.

 

[The Old Soul]

Does anyone have any data on what percentage of people who transition later regret it?

What does "90% success rate" mean? You have some kind of evidence that 90% of transgenders who get the drugs, hormones and surgeries are proven to be better off than if they did get them? You found good scientific evidence for that? One small biased short term study? Multiple large long term quality studies? How come you don't support your statements with links?

Try reading the entire thread...
The links and information I provided in links above with professional surveys and data that both satisfy and/or refute opinion are ignored in these threads because it does not fit the rhetoric of the anti-everything crowd. If someone makes a hateful, closedminded statement deriding this topic gets responses, but put out some actual data or experiences of the trans among us and it gets avoided like the plague.

It's almost like those who appear to see and analyze both sides subjectively enjoy getting into the trap the most prejudice and closedminded set for them.

You want actual data? Read this thread in entirety instead of pretending it does not exist. And quit feeding the trolls.

 

[Mina]

Try reading the entire thread...
The links and information I provided in links above with professional surveys and data that both satisfy and/or refute opinion are ignored in these threads because it does not fit the rhetoric of the anti-everything crowd. If someone makes a hateful, closedminded statement deriding this topic gets responses, but put out some actual data or experiences of the trans among us and it gets avoided like the plague.

It's almost like those who appear to see and analyze both sides subjectively enjoy getting into the trap the most prejudice and closedminded set for them.

You want actual data? Read this thread in entirety instead of pretending it does not exist. And quit feeding the trolls.

Salty. If you expect someone to read 13 pages of thread before commenting, in case something has already been addressed elsewhere, you're setting yourself up for disappointment. What would serve you better than immediately reacting by whining like a little bitch about it, would just be politely saying that you addressed something in post number X, so they can go and read it.

 

[Good4Nothin]

Nobody is multilating anything. There are no crimes against nature because of a medical procedures. Nobody is forced to do anything and there are no crimes being committed by voluntary medical care. Conversion therapy is abusive with a zero success rate.

If your god would stop making so many trans people, then Drs wouldnt have to fix his mistakes, if your god exists, which is an impossiblity.

Cutting off someone's penis and testicles is mutilation. Removing a young woman's breasts and ovaries is mutilation. Doesn't matter if you call it a "medical procedure."

And now everything that does not involve mutilation is called abusive conversion therapy.

 

[Good4Nothin]

We will have data in the future, but neither of us knows what it will say. For the sake of argument, though, imagine that it says that those who transitioned only later regretted it in one out of 100 cases, while those who were forced to delay transition until adulthood had enough of an increased risk of suicide that it effectively killed 50 out of 100 of them. Would that change your view on the question? It would change mine. Then I'd be in favor of earlier transitions for those with consistently established desires for it. For now, though, I don't know the data, so I'm neutral.

Imagine that pigs can fly. But that's what the activists expect you to believe -- every kid who says they are trans must be "affirmed" right away or they will die. So not rushing to cut off a boy's penis would be murder.

 

[Mina]

Imagine that pigs can fly. But that's what the activists expect you to believe -- every kid who says they are trans must be "affirmed" right away or they will die. So not rushing to cut off a boy's penis would be murder.

You've misunderstood the argument..... deliberately, of course.

Nobody has argued that there must be instant affirmation of everyone or they'll die. We're talking here about a practical question like the situation in the top post: how to deal with someone who has wanted to transition for years, but still isn't an adult.

Are we better off allowing medical transition to start at that point, or postponing it further? I don't know the answer to that. I can see it going either way.

Maybe the data tell us that even after three years, there's still a pretty significant chance a minor's identity is evolving enough that he or she will come to regret any permanent steps taken towards transition. Maybe the data says that any negative psychological impact from further waiting would be minor (such impacts including a lifetime of living in a body that conforms less with internal sense of gender than it would if transition had started earlier). And, if so, then delay sounds good. Or maybe the data says that nearly nobody who has wanted to transition for that long comes to regret it, while suicide rates among those who delay transition are much higher than those who don't, such that delay comes with a big body count.

I seriously don't know what the data say on this. I'm open minded about it. But I'm leaning to the left in part because those who are arguing on that side seem to genuinely care about the well-being of trans people, whereas those on the right tend to portray them as defective, as part of an ongoing political culture war.

 

[Lisa]

Cutting off someone's penis and testicles is mutilation. Removing a young woman's breasts and ovaries is mutilation. Doesn't matter if you call it a "medical procedure."

And now everything that does not involve mutilation is called abusive conversion therapy.

No it isn't mutilation when those parts are causing gender dysphoria. In many cases the patients have tried to remove them themselves. You don't seem to understand psychological gender identity or gender dysphoria., despite your previous laughable claim of having a PhD in psychology that is very obviously not true.


What are the other possible treatment options that have shown effectiveness other than the currently proven hormones and then GCS if the drs/therapists and patient decide that is what they patient wants and needs? Not doing anything or just anti-depressants isn't an option. Nobody is forced to do anything and the parents/guardian cannot force anything on the teen, despite the right wing propaganda that you consume by choice. The treatment can stop at any point of the patient changes their mind or the Drs/therapists seen contraindications. This is a long process with many safeguards, despite someone is convinced you.

Your emotional arguments are not impressive.

 

[CLAX1911]

Those systems are causing issues, though, for those who want them removed. They are causing severe psychological distress.

but the ethic is first Do no harm. If you sterilize and cripple a person you're doing them harm. It's important to determine if that's causing them harm or if it's something else.

I haven't taken any position on whether such interventions are appropriate at that age. I'm just looking for data on which to base that position. How common is it for someone who is 15, and has wanted to transition consistently from age 12, to later regret transitioning? I'd think that would be a key question we'd want answered when making a decision. If it's common, better to wait, even knowing we're going to be causing a lot of distress to those who want to transition but are denied that. But what if it's the medical equivalent of someone who dies of a severe allergic reaction to a common antibiotic that was prescribed for an infection? Such freak cases do happen, and we don't deny people antibiotics out of fear of that exceedingly rare risk. We play the odds. That's what I'd want to see here: even if there's a risk of someone later regretting a transition, if that is very rare and significantly outweighed by, say, excess suicides associated with denying such people transition, then we'd be doing more harm than good denying it. I'd want to know more about the numbers before taking a position on that.

in order to get data on it you have to practice unethical behavior.

 

[CLAX1911]

I haven't called for butchering anyone.

well people who are calling for transgender surgery or coloring for exactly that

The question of what does greater harm is exactly the question we're discussing.

it's obvious experimenting on people does more harm than not experimenting on people this is disabilitative ethical question ever asked on the face of the planet before

 

[Rawley]

Cutting off someone's penis and testicles is mutilation. Removing a young woman's breasts and ovaries is mutilation. Doesn't matter if you call it a "medical procedure."

And now everything that does not involve mutilation is called abusive conversion therapy.

I'd just preface those with "healthy."

 

[Lisa]

but the ethic is first Do no harm. If you sterilize and cripple a person you're doing them harm. It's important to determine if that's causing them harm or if it's something else.

How do you you effectively treat gender dysphoria without removing those parts that the patient doesn't want anyhow? Trans female do not want their penis and testicles. This is why they seek hormonal transition and then orchiectomy and/or GCS. The exsitance of those organs is a source of gender dysphoria. They hate them. Trans guys dont want their breasts, uterus and ovaries. Trans females females tuck to hide their penis. Trans guys wear a binder to hide their breast and proudly show off the scares of their mastectomy.


That desperate desire for hormonal transition and removal is the core idea of what makes then transgender. How do you not see this?

 

[CLAX1911]

How do you you effectively treat gender dysphoria without removing those parts that the patient doesn't want anyhow? Trans female do not want their penis and testicles. This is why they seek hormonal transition and then orchiectomy and/or GCS. The exsitance of those organs is a source of gender dysphoria. They hate them. Trans guys dont want their breasts, uterus and ovaries. Trans females females tuck to hide their penis. Trans guys wear a binder to hide their breast and proudly show off the scares of their mastectomy.


That desperate desire for hormonal transition and removal is the core idea of what makes then transgender. How do you not see this?

The baseline ethic is first to do no harm. When you're sterilizing people and castrating them that's doing harm.

Gender dysphoria is a psychological disorder. Any method without doing harm must first be exhausted.

 

[Mina]

but the ethic is first Do no harm. If you sterilize and cripple a person you're doing them harm

That's not how it's perceived by those seeking the help. They think that by denying them that medical care, you're doing them harm, by forcing them to live with a body that is badly out of line with their conception of their own gender.

in order to get data on it you have to practice unethical behavior.

Yes, and the argument here is it would be unethical to deny those people the medical assistance they want, simply because it creeps out your conservative sexual ideas.

 

[Mina]

well people who are calling for transgender surgery or coloring for exactly that

They are not. What made you imagine they were?

it's obvious experimenting on people does more harm than not experimenting on people this is disabilitative ethical question ever asked on the face of the planet before

It's not at all obvious that providing gender confirmation medical care does more harm than leaving such people to suffer without such an intervention. That's the whole question we're examine, and you can't just say "well, it's obvious" and imagine that you've established a point.

 

[CLAX1911]

That's not how it's perceived by those seeking the help.

Yeah and people who sucks conversion therapy perceived it is helpful too.

That's how scams work.

They think that by denying them that medical care, you're doing them harm, by forcing them to live with a body that is badly out of line with their conception of their own gender.

amateur psychology is up no value to anyone.

Yes, and the argument here is it would be unethical to deny those people the medical assistance they want,

but this isn't medical assistance it's injury and experimentation.

Like you said you haven't seen the data so just go ahead and not knowing anything about it. That's completely unethical.

simply because it creeps out your conservative sexual ideas.

I think you're just saying this because someone's threatening your stupid little virtue signal.

You're not protecting people by letting so-called doctors do medical experiments on them.

 

[DarkWizard12]

The only thing you fear is having an encounter with a transgendered person.

is it? maybe it's worth having a discussion about risks before we start changing children's entire physiology to satisfy someone else's sexual feelings?

 

[RetiredUSN]

What the ****? How can you say that as a trans person? Why do you want to pull up the ladder from under you?

Here's a great Twitter feed for people like you.




They are sick of you and your ilk and the damage you are doing to the gay community with your assaults on children.

 

[Lisa]

Here's a great Twitter feed for people like you.




They are sick of you and your ilk and the damage you are doing to the gay community with your assaults on children.

Who is assaulting or doing any damage to anyone of any age? Who told you that people are being forced to do anything or even encouraged to do another, even Drs or therapists? Trans people of all ages are diagnosed by their choice, and then given their treatment options, one of which is always to walk away and do nothing.

Yopu should look in the mirror because that is where the problem is instead of accusing people of something that they didn't do.

 

[CLAX1911]

They are not. What made you imagine they were?

lie to yourself all you need to. I'm not going to stop saying reality to you because you need to hear it.

If you're not too scared look into the detrans people. imagine yourself in their shoes. You're very confused 15 year old who wasn't and instead of letting you figure out things for yourself some doctor had to experiment on you. And now any sexual gratification that you would have ever had is completely gone. Or your breasts are gone. It's too late to change your mind after someone's butchered you.

It's not at all obvious that providing gender confirmation medical care does more harm than leaving such people to suffer without such an intervention.

it's not obvious that whatever the hell "gender confirmation medical Care" is, is there anything but a scam to take advantage of people in an emotional state to make hundreds of thousands of dollars.

That's the whole question we're examine, and you can't just say "well, it's obvious" and imagine that you've established a point.

It seems like I'm the only one here doing anything examining. I'm not the one dead set on protecting a virtue signal.

This entire ranch of psychology was created by a pedophile that wanted an excuse to abuse children. And his experiment failed the result was actual human being that I care about that was used as a guinea pig was so depressed over what happened to him that he took his own life.

And you think it's a good idea to inflict this on anyone else.

Don't talk to me about ethics you don't have the first clue.

 

[DarkWizard12]

A teenager who drinks and drives is just as responsible for their own actions, and the consequences of those actions, as a teenager who transitions.

Laws disagree with you on that. A teenager who drinks and drive is NOT held to the same responsibility as a fully grown adult(2000 dollar fine + suspension vs 3 days to 180 days in jail)

 

[RetiredUSN]

Who is assaulting or doing any damage to anyone of any age? Who told you that people are being forced to do anything or even encouraged to do another, even Drs or therapists? Trans people of all ages are diagnosed by their choice, and then given their treatment options, one of which is always to walk away and do nothing.

Yopu should look in the mirror because that is where the problem is instead of accusing people of something that they didn't do.

Gay people see right through people like you.

I don't have to say a freaking word at all for that matter.

They know what you are up to.

 

[CLAX1911]

is it? maybe it's worth having a discussion about risks before we start changing children's entire physiology to satisfy someone else's sexual feelings?

Especially considering that it changes. Gender fluidity is a thing.