this post was submitted on 18 Apr 2024

57 points (96.7% liked)

Europe

8484 readers

1 users here now

News/Interesting Stories/Beautiful Pictures from Europe 🇪🇺

(Current banner: Thunder mountain, Germany, 🇩🇪 ) Feel free to post submissions for banner pictures

Rules

(This list is obviously incomplete, but it will get expanded when necessary)

Be nice to each other (e.g. No direct insults against each other);
No racism, antisemitism, dehumanisation of minorities or glorification of National Socialism allowed;
No posts linking to mis-information funded by foreign states or billionaires.

Also check out [email protected]

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

[email protected]

Scotland's under-18s gender clinic pauses puberty blockers (www.bbc.com)

submitted 7 months ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

21 comments fedilink hide all child comments

top 21 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old

[–] [email protected] 20 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) (6 children)

This stuff is so stupid.

Puberty blockers aren't transitioning, it's pausing until a person is.old enough to decide if they do want to transition. Because not all effects of puberty are reversible with hormone therapy.

But I was over 6 feet tall and needing to shave my face before I was a teenager. Even though I never thought of transitioning, I would have preferred being on puberty blockers so I didn't look old enough to be some of my classmates dads.

And unfortunately early puberty can be a lot more problematic with girls than it was for me.

It just never made sense why so many idiots are mad puberty is being delayed. It's like they want to see a lot of children running around with the bodies of adults and the minds/experience of children...

[–] [email protected] 18 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) (1 children)

I’d be curious to see how many people on puberty blockers go through a full transition.

Edit: I googled it after and apparently the number is extraordinarily high, like 98%+

[–] [email protected] 14 points 7 months ago

That's the frustrating thing about this whole debate. Everyone with any knowledge knows that puberty blockers are a safe and sensible intervention with "gender questioning" kids. Like it took you maybe 30 seconds to figure this out. There is no ambiguity here. Anyone who says otherwise is being incredibly dishonest

[–] [email protected] 4 points 7 months ago (1 children)

Once again, people with no counterarguments are downvoting a reasonable take

[–] [email protected] -4 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago)

I mean, they did call people with an opposing view 'idiots'.

This makes the comment sound less reasonable, especially to somebody of an opposing view.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 7 months ago (1 children)

Wasn't one of the reasons that the long term effects of puberty blockers weren't known, and therefore caution was advised? I might be misremembering though.

[–] [email protected] 17 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) (1 children)

I might be misremembering though

Yep, you are.

They started being prescribed in the 80s for the reason im talking about. For the US they were approved in 1993.

While not prescribed widely, there's been more than enough for a sample size.

When people say "studies need to be done" they're arguing for double blind studies where children might get the real drug, and may get a placebo. And they want the whole sample to be kids who may want to transition.

It's not ethical to do a study like that, and you literally can't do a long-term study like that with this, it's kind of obvious when puberty still happens.... The placebo group should just be kids not on puberty blockers compared to kids on blockers. And those studies exist and have for a long time.

The whole argument is dishonest and designed to make people not familiar with science think they're the reasonable ones.

They're not.

They're just ignorant and opinionated.

Which is the last demographic we should be listening to on scientific research.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 7 months ago (1 children)

Fair. I don't have a strong opinion on the matter.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) (1 children)

You should do though. Not necessarily on the topic, but a group who definitely know what you were just told when they spouted off about the lack of evidence, effectively tried to gaslight you with “scientific process”.

I think we need to normalise being pissed off at being lied to like this. You don’t need to become a pro-trans advocate but you can still say “fuck’em” to the people demonstrably deceiving you.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 7 months ago (1 children)

You're deceptive too. The motivations of this law are not purely transphobia and you damn well know that. This isn't that black and white. There's scientific conjecture on both sides of this issue. Not having a strong opinion on some things us what this society needs. Not outraged mobs like you.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 6 months ago

What part of my comments were deceptive? I didn’t comment on the law, or the scientific “conjecture” on both sides. I encouraged a user to be upset that someone told them an obvious lie; I even pointed out that they don’t have to be pro-trans to be angered by that. I’m not a mob, I’m not outraged, I’m irked on principle that obvious claptrap is being used as a tool to bamboozle those with less time to think about things. If the strength of scientific conjecture was so strong surely the debate could rest on actual science, not proposing disingenuous sub-ethical studies. I didn’t comment on any of what you’ve accused me of…until now.

The reason it can’t is stand on its own scientific merits is because, though it would be great for anti-trans campaigners if it did, the science doesn’t really back their view-point of “gender realism”. It’s not a scientific debate, it’s one of social and emotive balance. I think that trans-men are men, and trans-women are women; both as it costs me nothing to recognise this, and because the science of “gendered brains” doesn’t slightly support the notion that gonad sex, and gender, are 1:1 aligned.

Frankly the irony of you coming in and accusing me of being an outraged mob is ridiculous. The only mob antics on display are yours, strawmanning and accusing me of things simply not present in my post.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 7 months ago

For real, they're saying "kids aren't old enough to choose permanent changes for their bodies!

Then force permanent changes onto those kid's bodies.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 7 months ago (1 children)

Puberty blockers are routinely used for early puberty. But this is about delaying what would be normal puberty to much later, i.e. having people with the body of children and the mind of teenagers. Let's not conflate the two.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 7 months ago (1 children)

Yeah, bro...

No one ever hits puberty late, if there was there's ba a phrase like "late bloomer" that's super common...

Seriously, are you just in highschool and think that would be the end of the world? Or that they actually look like children?

[–] [email protected] 1 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago)

I'm simply using your stupid way of phrasing things with you, and you still confirm being incredibly immature in your way of arguing. Your reasoning in the last phrase is completely fallacious. The funniest thing is I am pretty much in agreement with you. I simply can't stand stupid reasoning.

[–] [email protected] -2 points 7 months ago (1 children)

It's like they want to see a lot of children running around with the bodies of adults and the minds/experience of children...

Are you saying that “children” (teenagers) should not have the “bodies of adults” (teenage bodies)?

[–] [email protected] 2 points 7 months ago (1 children)

...

I honestly don't know what I should ask first...

Why you think a 12 year old is a teenager...

Why you don't understand why someone's mind and body may develop at different rates..

Why you think a teenager and an adults bodies are the same...

Why you don't think a teenager is still a child...

There's just so much shit in that short sentence that makes zero sense. It would be hilarious if not being able to tell the difference between a child an adult wasn't so important for so many reasons.

[–] [email protected] -3 points 7 months ago (1 children)

You are the one who suggested that people undergoing puberty have the body of an adult. And who said anything about 12 year olds?

[–] [email protected] 0 points 7 months ago (1 children)

If I told you Michael Jordan played in the NBA in his 20s, would you think every person played in the NBA in their 20s? Or would you think everyone in their 20's is named Jordan?

What about if I said I had red hair, would you think everyone had red hair? Or would you say every color of hair was a shade of red?

I am just fucking fascinated by your opinions and the path your brain takes to get there...

[–] [email protected] -2 points 7 months ago

I have no idea what you’re going on about. I know how predicate logic works, thank you.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 7 months ago

I've not seen any legitimate refutation of the Cass review so far. The 98% of studies critique was explored and rejected on More or Less: Behind the Stats on Radio4 this week. The programme can probably explain it better than me but essentially the trials of "moderate" quality were not thrown out, and were taken into consideration in the results.

Other criticisms seem more like emotional responses where people complain about the language being overly medicalised. Or similarly, the report reading like something from the past where academia considered homosexuality to be a mental disorder. Personally I don't think the phrasing - even if it is clumsy - can delegitimise the conclusions.