“ I hope that “gender-affirming care” and “gender-inclusive curriculum” turns into somewhere between one and three sentences a year, starting in kindergarten. Some iteration of this: “Girls and boys can look and act all kinds of different ways.” “
We had this in the ‘70s in the form of “Free to Be — You and Me.” Sad how much we’ve regressed since then.
As a child of the 70s in the uk I was going to say that - we didn’t have free to be you and me but fashion for kids here was very unisex and we were beginning to have expectations that girls and boys can all pursue academic achievements
"Trans kids" are to gender identity ideology what "babies" are to the anti-abortion movement. Invoking either automatically causes critics of the cause to look like monsters and makes a toxic belief system seem relatable.
--Will United States v. Skrmetti’s argument, that the bans are discriminatory because they outlaw interventions only for transition, and “leaves the same treatments entirely unrestricted if they are prescribed for any other purpose”?--
It's often said that puberty blockers are jim-dandy because, hey, nobody complains when "cis" kids get them. I have to grit my teeth when I hear this, because it's really just a facile way of pretending not to understand what we have always understood. The reason people take medication absolutely matters. An oral surgeon prescribed me a four-day course of oxycodone to help me get through the pain of a dental procedure, but I am sure she would have balked if I'd asked for the same because I'm going to be working out a lot and some oxy would sure feel nice. And reasonably so! Oxy is addictive and can be dangerous, so in prescribing it the physician considered a) the need; and b) the amount of time I'd take it.
Similarly, it is one thing to put a nine-year-old on PB's for a year or two to stop precocious puberty and allow time for her brain to catch up to her body; it's another to put her on PB's for the REST OF HER LIFE. This isn't rocket-science.
I vote for the last scenario. I teach high school, and this year my brightest student was the only student who did not have a cell phone. At the same time, I have noticed that it is often families with fewer resources that use tablets as pacifiers.
In three recent discussions I've read about cell phones each has presented the iPhone as the vital link to community that some young people need their phones to access. No discussion about how those online communities are not the best sandbox for creating healthy human interaction. Or that they may actually create worlds that cannot be transferred to analog. As we move our imaginations into the virtual world we're creating a host of teenagers that prefer to live there with their invisible friends immune from gravity and consequence.
I looked at the link for "the US’s only real long-term follow-up study of transitioned youth [which] shows a shockingly high suicide rate." But the only stats I saw showed that people felt better after they transitioned, not worse.
Can somebody direct me to the shockingly high suicide rate in that study? My understanding is that suicide is not a red herring, but a sad fact. However, I'd like to see the data. Thank you.
Feeling better does not correlate to lower suicide rates, so it's important not to conflate those. Interestingly enough, there's only a loose correlation between suicidal ideation (thinking about suicide) and completed suicide (dead bodies). The first is often used as a proxy for the second, but the numbers don't bear that out.
It's also important to look the time frame of the study. Most people do feel better two months after "treatment". They've got strong motivation to feel that way. Most people feel pretty good shortly after getting something they asked for and wanted. Immediate regret is rare. Longer term regret is more common.
Finally, watch out for selection bias. How were the study participants chosen?
I don't disagree with your logic, in principle. And I'm not skeptical per se regarding high suicide rates among people who transition; in fact, I know that the numbers are higher after people transition, not before...when they discover that they did irrevocable harm to their bodies and sink into despair.
But wouldn't you assume that if an analysis of a scientific paper claims to have found a "a shockingly high suicide rate," those data would be in the article? I didn't see them. Where are they?
"A total of 315 transgender and nonbinary participants 12 to 20 years of age (mean [±SD], 16±1.9) were enrolled in the study...The most common adverse event was suicidal ideation (in 11 participants [3.5%]); death by suicide occurred in 2 participants." ?
I'm not an epidemiologist and I would not have thought that 2 suicides out of 315 (0.63%) is a high suicide rate. Thank you very much for clarifying. I appreciate it.
"Perhaps something similar will happen with gender. Rather than follow England’s lead by prohibiting the teaching of the “contested theory of gender identity” in schools, we will segregate those teachings by class. The most privileged children will go to schools where, in place of social justice teachings, they learn critical thinking, math, literature, life skills, and job skills. And perhaps those lower on the totem pole won’t."
I am still dealing half a century later with the trauma I experienced as a relative outsider at a New England boarding among some of the nation's most privileged and elite children. Based on how the school elevates gender on its website today, I would say that gender identity ideology has thoroughly captured that institution the way it has public schools in progressive communities across the country. Of course there's an active Gender and Sexuality Alliance on campus. In fact, it recently hosted the annual Interschool Gender & Sexuality Conference that attracted scores of students from over a dozen schools.
God forbid a student should wear a baseball cap in classroom buildings or the dining hall like a common townie, but the school is very proud of its commitment to diversity, inclusion and multicultural competence.
I don't see how that school or any other K-12 institution that has drunk the trans KoolAid is going to purge its system.
When I hear “gender-analog childhood,” I picture something along the lines of “Free to Be… You and Me.”
“ I hope that “gender-affirming care” and “gender-inclusive curriculum” turns into somewhere between one and three sentences a year, starting in kindergarten. Some iteration of this: “Girls and boys can look and act all kinds of different ways.” “
We had this in the ‘70s in the form of “Free to Be — You and Me.” Sad how much we’ve regressed since then.
As a child of the 70s in the uk I was going to say that - we didn’t have free to be you and me but fashion for kids here was very unisex and we were beginning to have expectations that girls and boys can all pursue academic achievements
We should not be referring to "trans kids". That concedes that there is such a thing as a child "who is born in the wrong body"
"Trans kids" are to gender identity ideology what "babies" are to the anti-abortion movement. Invoking either automatically causes critics of the cause to look like monsters and makes a toxic belief system seem relatable.
--Will United States v. Skrmetti’s argument, that the bans are discriminatory because they outlaw interventions only for transition, and “leaves the same treatments entirely unrestricted if they are prescribed for any other purpose”?--
It's often said that puberty blockers are jim-dandy because, hey, nobody complains when "cis" kids get them. I have to grit my teeth when I hear this, because it's really just a facile way of pretending not to understand what we have always understood. The reason people take medication absolutely matters. An oral surgeon prescribed me a four-day course of oxycodone to help me get through the pain of a dental procedure, but I am sure she would have balked if I'd asked for the same because I'm going to be working out a lot and some oxy would sure feel nice. And reasonably so! Oxy is addictive and can be dangerous, so in prescribing it the physician considered a) the need; and b) the amount of time I'd take it.
Similarly, it is one thing to put a nine-year-old on PB's for a year or two to stop precocious puberty and allow time for her brain to catch up to her body; it's another to put her on PB's for the REST OF HER LIFE. This isn't rocket-science.
"... unrestricted if they are prescribed fo any other purpose." That is, as a safe and effective remedy for an identifiable medical disorder.
If you're pursuing conjuring, it's time to consult DRAWING DOWN THE MOON.
I vote for the last scenario. I teach high school, and this year my brightest student was the only student who did not have a cell phone. At the same time, I have noticed that it is often families with fewer resources that use tablets as pacifiers.
In three recent discussions I've read about cell phones each has presented the iPhone as the vital link to community that some young people need their phones to access. No discussion about how those online communities are not the best sandbox for creating healthy human interaction. Or that they may actually create worlds that cannot be transferred to analog. As we move our imaginations into the virtual world we're creating a host of teenagers that prefer to live there with their invisible friends immune from gravity and consequence.
I looked at the link for "the US’s only real long-term follow-up study of transitioned youth [which] shows a shockingly high suicide rate." But the only stats I saw showed that people felt better after they transitioned, not worse.
Can somebody direct me to the shockingly high suicide rate in that study? My understanding is that suicide is not a red herring, but a sad fact. However, I'd like to see the data. Thank you.
Feeling better does not correlate to lower suicide rates, so it's important not to conflate those. Interestingly enough, there's only a loose correlation between suicidal ideation (thinking about suicide) and completed suicide (dead bodies). The first is often used as a proxy for the second, but the numbers don't bear that out.
It's also important to look the time frame of the study. Most people do feel better two months after "treatment". They've got strong motivation to feel that way. Most people feel pretty good shortly after getting something they asked for and wanted. Immediate regret is rare. Longer term regret is more common.
Finally, watch out for selection bias. How were the study participants chosen?
Good luck!
I don't disagree with your logic, in principle. And I'm not skeptical per se regarding high suicide rates among people who transition; in fact, I know that the numbers are higher after people transition, not before...when they discover that they did irrevocable harm to their bodies and sink into despair.
But wouldn't you assume that if an analysis of a scientific paper claims to have found a "a shockingly high suicide rate," those data would be in the article? I didn't see them. Where are they?
It's right there in the paper. 2/315
I assume you're referring to this paragraph:
"A total of 315 transgender and nonbinary participants 12 to 20 years of age (mean [±SD], 16±1.9) were enrolled in the study...The most common adverse event was suicidal ideation (in 11 participants [3.5%]); death by suicide occurred in 2 participants." ?
I'm not an epidemiologist and I would not have thought that 2 suicides out of 315 (0.63%) is a high suicide rate. Thank you very much for clarifying. I appreciate it.
"Perhaps something similar will happen with gender. Rather than follow England’s lead by prohibiting the teaching of the “contested theory of gender identity” in schools, we will segregate those teachings by class. The most privileged children will go to schools where, in place of social justice teachings, they learn critical thinking, math, literature, life skills, and job skills. And perhaps those lower on the totem pole won’t."
I am still dealing half a century later with the trauma I experienced as a relative outsider at a New England boarding among some of the nation's most privileged and elite children. Based on how the school elevates gender on its website today, I would say that gender identity ideology has thoroughly captured that institution the way it has public schools in progressive communities across the country. Of course there's an active Gender and Sexuality Alliance on campus. In fact, it recently hosted the annual Interschool Gender & Sexuality Conference that attracted scores of students from over a dozen schools.
God forbid a student should wear a baseball cap in classroom buildings or the dining hall like a common townie, but the school is very proud of its commitment to diversity, inclusion and multicultural competence.
I don't see how that school or any other K-12 institution that has drunk the trans KoolAid is going to purge its system.