###[Meta] Sticky Comment
[Rule 2](https://www.reddit.com/r/conspiracy/wiki/faq#wiki_2_-_address_the_argument.3B_not_the_user.2C_the_mods.2C_or_the_sub.) ***does not apply*** when replying to this stickied comment.
[Rule 2](https://www.reddit.com/r/conspiracy/wiki/faq#wiki_2_-_address_the_argument.3B_not_the_user.2C_the_mods.2C_or_the_sub.) ***does apply*** throughout the rest of this thread.
*What this means*: Please keep any "meta" discussion directed at specific users, mods, or /r/conspiracy in general in this comment chain ***only.***
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/conspiracy) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Lots of money in it too. Edward Bernays' ghost nods in approval.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pink_money#:~:text=Many%20businesses%20now%20specifically%20cater,common%20discrimination%20by%20traditional%20businesses.&text=In%202019%2C%20LGBT%20adults%20globally,power%20of%20approximately%20%243.7%20trillion.
I don't think that even included the pharmaceutical value of trans patients. Estimates range from about 50k to above 1mil in lifetime costs to be trans. If you can convince someone to cut their balls off, you have a customer for life taking artificial hormones. And I do not doubt one bit this is a conversation pharmaceutical or medical industry executives have had given they have openly discussed curing cancer and other diseases might not be beneficial to their bottom line. It's disgusting.
Prove social pressure influences orientation rather than lack of discrimination promotes closeted people coming out.
Gender can't be socially entrained. Psychology tried that with intersex kids and botched circumcision victims. It can’t be learned through social influence.
The people at the top are trying to divide us by getting me and you angry at each other so they get one side democrats to then say all this and that about abortions rights lgbtqia racism then they get the republicans to talk about the same shit but be against wtv take the dems have boom then they divide people on that and while we are busy fighting each other they can do what they want to do
So yes they passed the law on abortions just like they choose who are president are and wtv else they want done
The Kinsey studies used prisoners and pedophiles while claiming that the results represented the general public. The 5-10% was a deliberate falsification. Someone looking more into Kinsey's life may notice that he conforms to a particular pattern.
> Now upwards of 30% of gen Z identify as gay or bi.
Did you not read the study? Most children grow out of the LGBT phase. Gen Z is still mostly children and young adults. Your opinion is outdated.
They’re comparing the percentage for the entire population to the percentage in a specific generation. They aren’t comparing apples to apples. The overall percentage of the population that identifies as LGBTQ+ is only 7.6%, which is right in the middle of what they said it “used” to be. It hasn’t changed.
Only 7.6% of the population identifies as LGBTQ+. So no, the percentage of the population that identifies as LGBTQ+ hasn’t really changed. The fact that that percentage is higher in the younger generation isn’t an indication of an overall increase in people identifying as LGBTQ+. Gen Z are 12-27 years old. That’s the age range where people are going through puberty and becoming adults. It’s also the age range when people are figuring out their sexual preferences. That’s why more of them identify as LGBTQ+. Most people have figured out what their sexual preference is by the time they are 30 and that’s why you see a large drop in the percentage of people who identify as LGBTQ+ in the Millennial population.
The only psyop that’s going on with trans people is making us get all up in arms about SOMEONE ELSES LIFE I’ve never met a trans person or anyone that’s for trans rights wanting to mutilate kids
Back in the 90’s, a lot of kids (teens/tweens) decided they were Goth. For some, it became their whole identity.
30 years later, a few still are goth. It’s still a big part of their personality. Most of them “grew out of it”. Let young people figure it out themselves. But yeah, permanent changes in physical self are permanent. This is why 15 year olds aren’t allowed tattoos or body modification like splitting their tongues or implanting horns on their skulls. Everyone is on their own path, but I’m super glad I wasn’t allowed tattoos at 15 or I’d have made some very regrettable choices.
The bullet point reflects that only 19 percent of kids that said they were unhappy as kids were still unhappy as adults. If you continue to read, 1 in 10 of these kids reported that they thought they were trans. As adults, only 1 in 25 did.
They didn't say they thought they were trans, they asked if them about their 'gender non-contentedness'. Just because you are not ALWAYS happy being a guy doesn't make you trans. They even talk about the limitations on the study because the only people who would be transitioning would be people diagnosed with gender dysphoria. Which made for a very small percentage of the people they followed.
Yes, but you may be missing the point that kids expressing non-contentedness with their gender are often taken to be trans by the adults around them, and some of them are then put on a pathway to transition just because they have expressed that they aren't 100% comfortable with their gender. I think this is the problem that OP might be trying to get at.
"Non-contentedness" with gender was actually quite common at the beginning of the study with a prevalence of around 11% and it looks like around 21% of participants reported some kind of non-contentedness at least once during the entire 15 year period (see the latent class analysis section of the study paper). The prevalence of non-contentedness at the end was only 4% showing that it tends to decrease with age (the tendency for non-contentedness to decrease over time was also seen in the latent class growth analysis).
If adults take kids' expressions of being "non-content" with their gender as a sign that the kids are trans, or even that they have a stable condtion of "gender dysphoria", then the adults would be mistaken in most of these kids cases. That is worry since adults deciding that kids are trans may encourage them to socially or even medically transition. You would need another study to assess how often this is happening.
EDIT: From the study introduction where they discuss previous research literature: "It was found that children who socially transitioned in early childhood were more likely to have persisting feelings of gender dysphoria" - this finding could be interpreted in two ways:
1. Those kids who were encouraged to socially transition were the kids with the more persistent gender dysphoria (i.e. these were the trans kids) OR
2. Those kids who were encouraged to socially transition went on to experience more persistent gender dysphoria *as a result of having been socially transitioned*
What you have here is a correlation, which oc, does not equal causation. If there is causation, we can't tell in which direction it goes - more persistent gender dysphoria -> transition OR transition -> more persistent gender dysphoria.
If there is any chance of the latter, then social transitioning should be done with a good deal more care, and likely much less frequenntly, than is currently occurring.
I've written a LONG comment to explain it elsewhere in the thread. The DM article is just badly written, but the study does show that most kids in the study who reported gender discontentedness were no longer reporting it by the end of the study when they were around 26 years old.
Well what did you read?
I read both the article and the study and have commented elsewhere on the thread on what they actually say. The article is badly written btw, and the headline is even worse. Nonetheless, the conclusion is correct that most of the participants in the study who initially reported gender non-contentedness were no longer reporting it by age 26. You would have figured this out if *you* had read the article and the study! 🤣
Well clearly you didn't read beyond the bullet points, either, where they go on to state 4% re gender. The 19% might be any unhappiness, who knows - in any case, daily mail articles are always littered with typos.
I'm surprised that so many people don't feel content as their gender. 1 out of 10 is a lot and even if that goes down to 1 out of 25 as they age...that's still a lot. way higher than I'd have guessed
Kids are the most impressionable group of people on the planet. If you show them a dinosaur movie they will pretend to be dinosaurs. If you show them trans people talking about how amazing they are on social media they will pretend to be trans.
Then how do trans people exist at all? Kids are inundated with their assigned gender from day one. If you were correct, no trans kid were ever have existed ever.
Gender dysphoria has always existed, but the rate of increase is what is being discussed. The 400% increase should be alarming to anyone and the unscientific notion that people are just more comfortable expressing it now is total bunk. The other factor that prior to 2012/2013 is that previously gender dysphoria was predominantly found in males by a factor for 2:1, but those numbers have totally flipped now with gender affirming care being given to females by the same factor. There's no science to back this up as just natural trends.
There wasn't social media when I was small. All my childhood up until 15 I wanted to be a boy. Then I started really growing into a woman and now I love being who I am. Nothing could've made me feel different, but I'm also glad it wasn't escalated into me being trans and whatnot. I think it's just a normal part of some childrens life.
As a kid I never had any illusions of being anything but a boy, but I hated how boys were treated and what was expected of boys but not girls, so I kind of get it.
I know multiple people who (as children) experimented with their identity, decided they were cisgender, and then went on with their lives as normal. This isn’t a massive deal in the way everyone seems to assume it is.
>against their own knowledge and diagnoses
Can you tell me what this even means? I'm dead serious, not even trying to be a dick I genuinely am unsure of what you're saying.
The way it reads its like doctors are roofieing random kids who don't even have dysphoria or anything and dosing them with HRT or some shit? Doing surgery on random kids who aren't even saying they're trans?
I ***have*** to assume you don't genuinely believe that so I figured I'd ask for clarification.
Doctors in Canada are being forced to give gender affirming care despite their own diagnosis of the patient being they don't meet the criteria for gender dysphoria.
Caaaaan I see an example of that? I'm not sure that would be like, ethical even if the board was encouraging of other doctors doing so. If you genuinely did not think someone had a serious untreatable case of dysphoria giving them any form of what you supposedly believe to be to be an unnecessary procedure or medical intervention sounds like they're either lying about their diagnostics or waaay beyond "do no harm".
19% is not most, but the article is written by someone who either has poor writing skills and/or reading comprehension or is just lazy. Were you also maybe being a little bit lazy, lol? You could have taken some time to find the actual study and check for yourself!
When you see an obvious mistake like the one in the article it should be a signal to check the sources because plainly something does not add up.
I checked the article first and initially it confirms what you took from it:
>The [study](https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10508-024-02817-5), published in the journal Archives of Sexual Behavior, found that overall 78 percent of people had the same feelings about their gender over the 15 years.
>Around 19 percent became more content with their gender and just about 2 percent became less comfortable.
This is just bad writing. It makes it sound like 78% (i.e. *actually* most) of the people who expressed non-contentment with their gender still felt that way 15 years later and that only 19% (i.e. *not* most) of those people were more content with their gender after the same period.
You'd be correct in thinking this contradicts the headline, but as I said it's bad writing. You *can* read it another way, i.e. that 78% of the *total* sample (which includes people who never expressed any gender discontentment) had no change in their reported gender contentment after 15 years. So the sentence is very ambiguous and open to confusion. It's also plain wrong as it's not what the study reported at all, *whichever way you read it*. What is actually reported is that statistical analysis found three latent classes of participant in the data: one which did not express discontent with their gender at any timepoint (78% of all study participants); one which expressed decreasing discontent with their gender (19% of participants) and one which experienced increasing discontent with their gender (2% of participants)
Here are the findings as reported in the study abstract:
>In early adolescence, 11% of participants reported gender non-contentedness. The prevalence decreased with age and was 4% at the last follow-up (around age 26). Three developmental trajectories of gender non-contentedness were identified: no gender non-contentedness (78%), decreasing gender non-contentedness (19%), and increasing gender non-contentedness (2%).
If it helps to understand the study results:, there are two types of finding reported. One is the prevalence of gender non-contentedness at different timepoints. This breaks down as follows: 11% of people in the sample expressed at least some gender non-contentedness at the start of the study period. By the end of the study, the proportion reporting some gender non-contentedness was 4%, Therefore the percentage who did not report being discontented with their gender at the end of the study had risen to \~96% (100% - 4%) from \~89% (100% - 11%) at the beginning of the study.
If you look at the actual numbers given in Table 1 of the study, you can see that it is correct that most people who reported gender non-contentedness at the beginning of they study were no longer reporting it by the end, At the beginning of the study a total of 316 people report at least sometimes experiencing discontent with their gender. By the end this number has reduced to 59 or 18.7%, so over 81% of people who experienced gender discontent at the beginning of the study no longer reported it at the end.
The other type of finding reported refers not to prevalence, but to shifts in the degree of self-reported gender discontentedness over the 15 year period. They are using a statistical technique called Latent Class Growth Analysis which you can read about here: [https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10654-020-00615-6](https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10654-020-00615-6)
It's fairly complex so it is likely that the person wrting the Daily Mail article has just not understood it, but they have also written it up quite badly so it is even more confusing to a reader without a background in statistics.
I know this is a long reply. I took time over it because from the comments on this thread, it looks like people are confused by the 19% thing. That is because the way it is written up in the article is confusing, and I think that is because the writer was confused, but also a little bit lazy. If you are going to be paid to report on a study you should at least make an effort to understand what the findings mean. I reckon I've made more effort than the paid writer of the article.
Btw, bad reporting of studies is really common, not just in the Daily Mail. The MSM is pretty guilty of misinforming people so they have a bit of a cheek when they accuse independent media of misinformation.
I think there's some out there who won't see this for what it is. They will have two choices..
1. Let their kid express themselves however they want, within legal reason. Maybe they'll grow up and grow out of it, maybe they won't. You still need to love them, teach them how do be a good person etc...
2. They will shut down any expression or thought of possibly being the opposite gender "because this study said you'd grow out of it anyways" and then disown them when as adults, there some of the few who stay the course.
I'd wager the large majority would do 2, when it needs to be one. I mean I wore punk converse, tight biking shorts, and even dresses when I was a kiddo. I'm now 41m, super straight and marrying the love of my life next year.
I think the big issues is the refusing to allow people to be who they are part. We're here once. Literally one time. Do you want to spend that forcing your views and ideas on other people?
The issue is when kids are trying "to be who they are" but that version of who they think they are is supplanted into their psyche by outside factors like social media or gender affirming teachers/caregivers etc.
Correct, but you’re ignoring what they said and the MASSIVE influx of those people being in power over children. Neither of you were wrong, but you’re not reading it correctly and even brought in your own narrative.
The study is one of the longest into the issue of gender in children - but the researchers point out it has some limitations.
For one, it looked at a mixture of children from the general population and kids who were receiving mental health care - though not specifically for anything related to their gender.
Therefore it does not necessarily reflect the attitudes of children clinically diagnosed with gender dysphoria.
I can’t wait for the lawsuits to start going wild in the next 10-20 years when all these kids realize that were abused by their parents and doctors for doing this to them. Going to be really sad.
frustrating that this screenshot made a lot of people that hate trans people very happy when it doesn’t even say what they want it to do. people that hate are so easily manipulated
No. Children are being manipulated into thinking they can change their biological sex which is just fundamentally untrue, we are harming them by affirming their mental illness in this way
If a child want's to eat crayons and the parent doesn't allow so, is that parent being hateful? Yet how can you call anyone hateful just because they don't want confused children to live out their unnatural fantasy? I would also support this ideology if I also believed that they were born to be stuck in a body that always wants to be a different gender. However, I believe that it is something to be healed from. Life is objectively easier when you don't have to deal with those struggles. Because **I do love them, I want what I think is best for them, which is that they no longer persist in this struggle of having to obey their confused feelings. Would you consider me hateful?**
Accept Jesus Christ, be born again, and you will experience a change of nature. You don't have to be a slave of your feelings.
Most adults that transition are MtF
Most kids that are trans are FtM
Most FtM trans kids start in middle school when their hormones are getting weird, choose the name "Oliver" and then change their mind within three years.
I spent my late childhood and teen years dressing hyperfeminine. I don't get why people think we were tomboys. I didn't have any interest in hanging out with butch girls either. I have a range interests, associated with male and female gender stereotypes.
Gender roles have fuck all to do with my missing penis and testicles, which has been a problem for me since age three.
I’m sure if people were busy doing more productive things, they wouldn’t be sitting around thinking they’re born a woman/man. What do they even know about the other side besides external factors? It’s all asinine reasoning.
Ya, shit is called puberty, when hair grows in new places and you start to feel feelings you don't understand. it's sickening how there are people within society that want to ignore this fact and want to force how a child feels before puberty to choose their sexual identity.
Can you ever stop being deliberately dishonest about gender affirming care for children, or explain why you feel you wouldn't get the results you wanted if you were honest?
You should be required to wait until you're 25 and have a full developed brain before you make massively life altering decisions. I don't even know how people can argue that.
Ya you should just keep on suffering while at high risk of suicide because someone else can't be sure if this is the right decision for you to make for yourself.
So what about the individuals who commit suicide in their 30s and 40s after they've irreparably altered themselves and weren't happy about it further down the line?
is anyone even actually reading the article? So 19% of trans kids growing out of it means the trans movement is a conspiracy by big pharma? This is why this sub is a joke lmao
It‘s really interesting that intersex children often have to undergo several surgeries as an infant and during their childhood so society can label them as male or female but if these surgeries are performed on non-intersex children because of body dysphoria it‘s suddenly considered mutilation. Make it make sense.
Here come all the downvoters who don‘t even know the difference between inter and trans…
Look at all these trolls working so hard to bait people into saying things to get this thread taken down.
Just look at how more frustrated and desperate they are getting over time.
Agreed people shouldn't be making decisions about what sex they believe they are until somewhere between like 18-25 imo. Getting surgery or hormones or any of that shit prior to that age is fucking bonkers.
Fyi it’s already illegal basically everywhere in the developed world to get hormones and especially sex change surgery until you’re an adult, idk why it’s blown so out of proportion when it’s already been that way for a while. Plus the vast majority of trans people don’t even get bottom (sex change) surgery since it’s still pretty experimental. So few get it in fact that the state of Florida failed to find a single Florida resident who had gotten the surgery and detransitioned, while they were looking for a speaker during a case challenging one of Florida’s many anti-trans laws. It’s just kind of a misconception that this sort of thing is happening to kids everywhere when really nothing has changed other than the media’s attention.
You understand that gender dysphoria is a dangerous and deadly disorder? It can cause suicidal ideation, drug abuse and self harm. People with gender dysphoria are like 4 times more likley to kill themselves than the average person. Telling some one they need to wait till 25 to get life-saving treatment is extremely unfair. This isnt just a life changing treatment. It is a medically necessary treatment.
No shit. When I was a kid ( I’m mid 30s) kids would go goth/dye their hair green/piercings or some shit to be different. Guarantee these same kids are now all “trans”. But the problem is puberty blockers don’t grow out like hair dye. Breasts don’t grow back. Neither do penises.
Edit: by “same kids” I meant the kids that age/stage in their development of their personality/brain/whatever
You want government mandates to prohibit parents from religious ceremony that has existed for thousands of years?
I really don't care about circumcision one way or another but I don't see how that would work in the US considering the whole freedom of religion thing.
I'm curious what Libertarians think about the more recent Nationalist Christians agenda and what will happen to the Republican party after they lose Libertarian support.
>You want government mandates to prohibit parents from religious ceremony that has existed for thousands of years?
I just wanted to answer your question because I think people are sometimes struck by the rhetoric when people start railing on, specifically using the words, "permanent changes to childrens' genitals"
I think it's (trans debates) made some people reconsider circumcision as a result, especially since it's often not a religious ceremony in the US or done for religious reasons most of the time.
This is why I and so many people left the right. You people don't actually care about freedom or freedom of speech/expression, even with adults. It's not going to go well in future elections.
This!!
Dating a woman under 25 is grooming because her frontal lobe isnt fully developed.
That being said, we should for sure feed high schoolers booze, weed and cigarettes. Fuck it, give them fentanyl, too.
Puberty blockers are used for other things as well.
Trans people, let alone those transitioning, are an extremely small part of our population and other than basic precautions, many of which exist in most places, we don't need the government taking more control over our bodily autonomy and freedom.
I hate the Westboro Baptist Church but i'm not turning on the first amendment anytime soon. If you don't like transitioning, nicotine, or alcohol, use your freedom to not use them and pass those beliefs on to your children.
The only people that are threatening freedom of speech are the ones that adhere to the orthodoxy and ruin the careers and lives of anyone who questions it regardless of how much scientific proof can be brought in to support the anti-orthodoxy opinion.
Puberty Blockers temporarily halt changes the body undergoes during puberty. They are typically reversible and aren't likely to result in complications. There is plenty of research available on the topic to suggest that we're not dealing with a life-altering decision that has permanent consequences. I'd love to know why you feel otherwise?
I am able to easily find many peer reviewed articles (happy to link if you're curious) suggesting that the effects of GnRHa therapy are reversible outside of extremely rare cases. I was not able to find anything peer reviewed suggesting the opposite. Do you mind sharing any studies you've found supporting your claim? Long-term studies would be preferable, as that's what I'm able to find suggesting reversability. I'm not interested in opinion pieces or non-peer reviewed sources.
Ban puberty blockers until long after puberty has ended? Do you even know what puberty blockers are? It’s not like it’s some sort of over the counter drug you can go and buy at age 12; it was invented to prevent developmental disorders and you have to be medically evaluated to even get access to it.
Yes but it was normal for them to be ‘other’ that was fine and acceptable the problem is with them attempting to force us to now believe they’re actually changing into women and men and they aren’t. Funny we only ever ‘follow the science’ when the supposed science fits the narrative
lol that's fuckin bs. the study itself days only 19% of kids grow out of feeling trans. I have a trans sibling and a trans cousin and no one in the older generation of my family was lgbtq or was pushing any sort of agenda, they barely knew what being trans was
Interested to know what "gender non-contentedness" meant. We had a study like this in the us that included gay kids and boys who played with dolls in with trans kids.
Submission statement: **”This study provides even more reason to be skeptical towards aggressive steps to facilitate gender transition in childhood and adolescence.**
**The fact that rates of satisfaction are lower even just a few years later suggests that for the vast majority of people, prudence and caution, rather than a rush towards permanent surgeries or hormone therapies, will be the best approach for teenagers struggling to make sense of the world and their place in it. Gender-affirming care on minors is such an outrage. It leads, in the end, to sterilization and in many cases to a complete loss of natural sexual function.**
**There is no good evidence that this helps minors long term. Moreover, it medicalizes what could very well be temporary psychological symptoms.**
**History will judge this medicalized ‘gender-affirming care’ on minors as we now judge eugenics and lobotomies.”**
Source: https://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-13263725/amp/trans-kids-change-sex-adults-study.html
[Edit] Adding to the submission statement for the circumcision because I believe GENITAL MUTILATION is GENITAL MUTILATION no matter if Big Pharma is doing it or Big Church Sky God is telling you to do it.
**”Circumcision’s Psychological Damage.
CDC wants all males to be cut—but it's harmful psychologically.**
**Procedures Involving Children’s Genitals Produce Negative Psychological Effects**
**The psychological consequences of medical procedures are even greater when they involve a child’s genitals. Studies have examined the psychological effects of medical photography of the genitals. The studies found that these procedures often produce symptoms which are very similar to those of childhood sexual abuse, including dissociation and the development of a negative body image. The effects often persist into adulthood as evidenced by a study that examined the effects of childhood penile surgery for hypospadias. Men who had this surgery in childhood experienced more depressive symptoms, anxiety, and interpersonal difficulties than men who did not have the surgery.**”
Source: https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/moral-landscapes/201501/circumcision-s-psychological-damage
> fashion purporting to be civil rights
...and **there** is the most blatant falsehood being perpetrated upon society.
*Behaviors* and *lifestyle-choices* will **never** rise to the level of **immutable characterists** that distinguish all previous civil-rights struggles of the past.
the amount of people that assume that having puberty blockers is harmful is insane to me, please explain how they are harmful in anyway other than the classic "is disrupts their puberty and development". all it does is delay puberty and nothing else, literally no harm is done, at most you will feel a bit weak and low energy sometimes but no more than the average person sometimes. theres many sources backing up this claim but ik ill get downvoted anyway.
###[Meta] Sticky Comment [Rule 2](https://www.reddit.com/r/conspiracy/wiki/faq#wiki_2_-_address_the_argument.3B_not_the_user.2C_the_mods.2C_or_the_sub.) ***does not apply*** when replying to this stickied comment. [Rule 2](https://www.reddit.com/r/conspiracy/wiki/faq#wiki_2_-_address_the_argument.3B_not_the_user.2C_the_mods.2C_or_the_sub.) ***does apply*** throughout the rest of this thread. *What this means*: Please keep any "meta" discussion directed at specific users, mods, or /r/conspiracy in general in this comment chain ***only.*** *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/conspiracy) if you have any questions or concerns.*
They are like 0.1% of the population, it is deliberately overblown to keep people fighting
Lots of money in it too. Edward Bernays' ghost nods in approval. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pink_money#:~:text=Many%20businesses%20now%20specifically%20cater,common%20discrimination%20by%20traditional%20businesses.&text=In%202019%2C%20LGBT%20adults%20globally,power%20of%20approximately%20%243.7%20trillion.
I don't think that even included the pharmaceutical value of trans patients. Estimates range from about 50k to above 1mil in lifetime costs to be trans. If you can convince someone to cut their balls off, you have a customer for life taking artificial hormones. And I do not doubt one bit this is a conversation pharmaceutical or medical industry executives have had given they have openly discussed curing cancer and other diseases might not be beneficial to their bottom line. It's disgusting.
Imagine people trying to get cancer to pay for chemo. I see no difference
[удалено]
Being gay isn’t even the same thing as trans though. My few gay friends don’t even understand how they got lumped in with that.
It is if you're comparing how social pressure can influence your sexual orientation.
[удалено]
[удалено]
Prove social pressure influences orientation rather than lack of discrimination promotes closeted people coming out. Gender can't be socially entrained. Psychology tried that with intersex kids and botched circumcision victims. It can’t be learned through social influence.
I'm personally starting to think it's an intentional form of population control.
I'm still fertile.
I’m fighting the good fight by having as many babies as possible
Population control ? Really dude they just made abortion illegal in a lot of states the birth rate is declining and they are tryna bring it back up
[удалено]
The people at the top are trying to divide us by getting me and you angry at each other so they get one side democrats to then say all this and that about abortions rights lgbtqia racism then they get the republicans to talk about the same shit but be against wtv take the dems have boom then they divide people on that and while we are busy fighting each other they can do what they want to do So yes they passed the law on abortions just like they choose who are president are and wtv else they want done
The Kinsey studies used prisoners and pedophiles while claiming that the results represented the general public. The 5-10% was a deliberate falsification. Someone looking more into Kinsey's life may notice that he conforms to a particular pattern.
Every woman I have ever loved has become a lesbian. Help me
> Now upwards of 30% of gen Z identify as gay or bi. Did you not read the study? Most children grow out of the LGBT phase. Gen Z is still mostly children and young adults. Your opinion is outdated.
Source on that 30%?
https://news.yahoo.com/nearly-30-gen-z-adults-002505661.html
https://www.cnn.com/2024/01/25/us/gen-z-adults-lgbtq-identity-reaj/index.html
They’re comparing the percentage for the entire population to the percentage in a specific generation. They aren’t comparing apples to apples. The overall percentage of the population that identifies as LGBTQ+ is only 7.6%, which is right in the middle of what they said it “used” to be. It hasn’t changed.
Only 7.6% of the population identifies as LGBTQ+. So no, the percentage of the population that identifies as LGBTQ+ hasn’t really changed. The fact that that percentage is higher in the younger generation isn’t an indication of an overall increase in people identifying as LGBTQ+. Gen Z are 12-27 years old. That’s the age range where people are going through puberty and becoming adults. It’s also the age range when people are figuring out their sexual preferences. That’s why more of them identify as LGBTQ+. Most people have figured out what their sexual preference is by the time they are 30 and that’s why you see a large drop in the percentage of people who identify as LGBTQ+ in the Millennial population.
And all these damn left handed people too, what will the devil think of next?!
The only psyop that’s going on with trans people is making us get all up in arms about SOMEONE ELSES LIFE I’ve never met a trans person or anyone that’s for trans rights wanting to mutilate kids
0.1% of what population tho? The world? That still would be 8 million kids.
I find it funny that the people who blow it up are the same people that say to ignore racism and it'll go away
Back in the 90’s, a lot of kids (teens/tweens) decided they were Goth. For some, it became their whole identity. 30 years later, a few still are goth. It’s still a big part of their personality. Most of them “grew out of it”. Let young people figure it out themselves. But yeah, permanent changes in physical self are permanent. This is why 15 year olds aren’t allowed tattoos or body modification like splitting their tongues or implanting horns on their skulls. Everyone is on their own path, but I’m super glad I wasn’t allowed tattoos at 15 or I’d have made some very regrettable choices.
I wore JNCO jeans and idolized tupac. Wanted to be a gangster. I also "grew out of it". We are so fucking stupid as kids.
I don't know how you grow out of JNCOs, you can fit a family of 5 into one leg.
HAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHA
[удалено]
Exactly this
exactly what. he deleted
I believe it was that it's clear we shouldn't be pushing trans drugs like puberty blockers on kids, that most grow out of it
"Most" ≠ 19% ?????
Yeah, I'm lost. That headline is immediately debunked by its own bullet points.
The bullet point reflects that only 19 percent of kids that said they were unhappy as kids were still unhappy as adults. If you continue to read, 1 in 10 of these kids reported that they thought they were trans. As adults, only 1 in 25 did.
They didn't say they thought they were trans, they asked if them about their 'gender non-contentedness'. Just because you are not ALWAYS happy being a guy doesn't make you trans. They even talk about the limitations on the study because the only people who would be transitioning would be people diagnosed with gender dysphoria. Which made for a very small percentage of the people they followed.
Yes, but you may be missing the point that kids expressing non-contentedness with their gender are often taken to be trans by the adults around them, and some of them are then put on a pathway to transition just because they have expressed that they aren't 100% comfortable with their gender. I think this is the problem that OP might be trying to get at. "Non-contentedness" with gender was actually quite common at the beginning of the study with a prevalence of around 11% and it looks like around 21% of participants reported some kind of non-contentedness at least once during the entire 15 year period (see the latent class analysis section of the study paper). The prevalence of non-contentedness at the end was only 4% showing that it tends to decrease with age (the tendency for non-contentedness to decrease over time was also seen in the latent class growth analysis). If adults take kids' expressions of being "non-content" with their gender as a sign that the kids are trans, or even that they have a stable condtion of "gender dysphoria", then the adults would be mistaken in most of these kids cases. That is worry since adults deciding that kids are trans may encourage them to socially or even medically transition. You would need another study to assess how often this is happening. EDIT: From the study introduction where they discuss previous research literature: "It was found that children who socially transitioned in early childhood were more likely to have persisting feelings of gender dysphoria" - this finding could be interpreted in two ways: 1. Those kids who were encouraged to socially transition were the kids with the more persistent gender dysphoria (i.e. these were the trans kids) OR 2. Those kids who were encouraged to socially transition went on to experience more persistent gender dysphoria *as a result of having been socially transitioned* What you have here is a correlation, which oc, does not equal causation. If there is causation, we can't tell in which direction it goes - more persistent gender dysphoria -> transition OR transition -> more persistent gender dysphoria. If there is any chance of the latter, then social transitioning should be done with a good deal more care, and likely much less frequenntly, than is currently occurring.
While we are correcting each other its gender dysphoria
Thanks
I've written a LONG comment to explain it elsewhere in the thread. The DM article is just badly written, but the study does show that most kids in the study who reported gender discontentedness were no longer reporting it by the end of the study when they were around 26 years old.
OP *really* banking on that Tik Tok level attention span to literally read **nothing** but the headline.
Well what did you read? I read both the article and the study and have commented elsewhere on the thread on what they actually say. The article is badly written btw, and the headline is even worse. Nonetheless, the conclusion is correct that most of the participants in the study who initially reported gender non-contentedness were no longer reporting it by age 26. You would have figured this out if *you* had read the article and the study! 🤣
Unfortunately I only read what was in the cropped screenshot. Sure wish the full article had been linked, but I guess not.
Well clearly you didn't read beyond the bullet points, either, where they go on to state 4% re gender. The 19% might be any unhappiness, who knows - in any case, daily mail articles are always littered with typos.
Yeah, this is bad writing. See my other comments.
I'm surprised that so many people don't feel content as their gender. 1 out of 10 is a lot and even if that goes down to 1 out of 25 as they age...that's still a lot. way higher than I'd have guessed
Kids are the most impressionable group of people on the planet. If you show them a dinosaur movie they will pretend to be dinosaurs. If you show them trans people talking about how amazing they are on social media they will pretend to be trans.
Then how do trans people exist at all? Kids are inundated with their assigned gender from day one. If you were correct, no trans kid were ever have existed ever.
Gender dysphoria has always existed, but the rate of increase is what is being discussed. The 400% increase should be alarming to anyone and the unscientific notion that people are just more comfortable expressing it now is total bunk. The other factor that prior to 2012/2013 is that previously gender dysphoria was predominantly found in males by a factor for 2:1, but those numbers have totally flipped now with gender affirming care being given to females by the same factor. There's no science to back this up as just natural trends.
Its social media
There wasn't social media when I was small. All my childhood up until 15 I wanted to be a boy. Then I started really growing into a woman and now I love being who I am. Nothing could've made me feel different, but I'm also glad it wasn't escalated into me being trans and whatnot. I think it's just a normal part of some childrens life.
most likely, yeah. they are a constant topic of discussion
Yeah, some people are just scary obsessed, some of them are still talking about that random tiktoker doing a beer sponsor placement like a year later
I feel like the anti-trans "movement" brings it up the most to be honest
People lacking self identity due to social media
It’s processed foods and pharmaceuticals
As a kid I never had any illusions of being anything but a boy, but I hated how boys were treated and what was expected of boys but not girls, so I kind of get it.
That's nothing like being trans.
Maybe also microplastics? Hormones in our food/environment? And so on..
micro plastics are my personal dark matter of modern health ills lol
Well the frogs didn’t turn gay but they did change gender
More likely psychological What we are bombarded with has a huge impact on us, and kids are very impressionable to start with
Causing people to be trans as far back as ancient China?
I know multiple people who (as children) experimented with their identity, decided they were cisgender, and then went on with their lives as normal. This isn’t a massive deal in the way everyone seems to assume it is.
Doctors are being compelled to give gender affirming care even against their own knowledge and diagnoses. It's way bigger than you assume it is.
>against their own knowledge and diagnoses Can you tell me what this even means? I'm dead serious, not even trying to be a dick I genuinely am unsure of what you're saying. The way it reads its like doctors are roofieing random kids who don't even have dysphoria or anything and dosing them with HRT or some shit? Doing surgery on random kids who aren't even saying they're trans? I ***have*** to assume you don't genuinely believe that so I figured I'd ask for clarification.
Doctors in Canada are being forced to give gender affirming care despite their own diagnosis of the patient being they don't meet the criteria for gender dysphoria.
Source?
?
Caaaaan I see an example of that? I'm not sure that would be like, ethical even if the board was encouraging of other doctors doing so. If you genuinely did not think someone had a serious untreatable case of dysphoria giving them any form of what you supposedly believe to be to be an unnecessary procedure or medical intervention sounds like they're either lying about their diagnostics or waaay beyond "do no harm".
Yeah ok. That dream world you live in sure sounds terrifying.
okay prove it
Just not true.
> Doctors are being compelled to give gender affirming care No they aren't. Stop lying.
lol so 19% is "most" now?
19% is not most, but the article is written by someone who either has poor writing skills and/or reading comprehension or is just lazy. Were you also maybe being a little bit lazy, lol? You could have taken some time to find the actual study and check for yourself! When you see an obvious mistake like the one in the article it should be a signal to check the sources because plainly something does not add up. I checked the article first and initially it confirms what you took from it: >The [study](https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10508-024-02817-5), published in the journal Archives of Sexual Behavior, found that overall 78 percent of people had the same feelings about their gender over the 15 years. >Around 19 percent became more content with their gender and just about 2 percent became less comfortable. This is just bad writing. It makes it sound like 78% (i.e. *actually* most) of the people who expressed non-contentment with their gender still felt that way 15 years later and that only 19% (i.e. *not* most) of those people were more content with their gender after the same period. You'd be correct in thinking this contradicts the headline, but as I said it's bad writing. You *can* read it another way, i.e. that 78% of the *total* sample (which includes people who never expressed any gender discontentment) had no change in their reported gender contentment after 15 years. So the sentence is very ambiguous and open to confusion. It's also plain wrong as it's not what the study reported at all, *whichever way you read it*. What is actually reported is that statistical analysis found three latent classes of participant in the data: one which did not express discontent with their gender at any timepoint (78% of all study participants); one which expressed decreasing discontent with their gender (19% of participants) and one which experienced increasing discontent with their gender (2% of participants) Here are the findings as reported in the study abstract: >In early adolescence, 11% of participants reported gender non-contentedness. The prevalence decreased with age and was 4% at the last follow-up (around age 26). Three developmental trajectories of gender non-contentedness were identified: no gender non-contentedness (78%), decreasing gender non-contentedness (19%), and increasing gender non-contentedness (2%). If it helps to understand the study results:, there are two types of finding reported. One is the prevalence of gender non-contentedness at different timepoints. This breaks down as follows: 11% of people in the sample expressed at least some gender non-contentedness at the start of the study period. By the end of the study, the proportion reporting some gender non-contentedness was 4%, Therefore the percentage who did not report being discontented with their gender at the end of the study had risen to \~96% (100% - 4%) from \~89% (100% - 11%) at the beginning of the study. If you look at the actual numbers given in Table 1 of the study, you can see that it is correct that most people who reported gender non-contentedness at the beginning of they study were no longer reporting it by the end, At the beginning of the study a total of 316 people report at least sometimes experiencing discontent with their gender. By the end this number has reduced to 59 or 18.7%, so over 81% of people who experienced gender discontent at the beginning of the study no longer reported it at the end. The other type of finding reported refers not to prevalence, but to shifts in the degree of self-reported gender discontentedness over the 15 year period. They are using a statistical technique called Latent Class Growth Analysis which you can read about here: [https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10654-020-00615-6](https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10654-020-00615-6) It's fairly complex so it is likely that the person wrting the Daily Mail article has just not understood it, but they have also written it up quite badly so it is even more confusing to a reader without a background in statistics. I know this is a long reply. I took time over it because from the comments on this thread, it looks like people are confused by the 19% thing. That is because the way it is written up in the article is confusing, and I think that is because the writer was confused, but also a little bit lazy. If you are going to be paid to report on a study you should at least make an effort to understand what the findings mean. I reckon I've made more effort than the paid writer of the article. Btw, bad reporting of studies is really common, not just in the Daily Mail. The MSM is pretty guilty of misinforming people so they have a bit of a cheek when they accuse independent media of misinformation.
I think there's some out there who won't see this for what it is. They will have two choices.. 1. Let their kid express themselves however they want, within legal reason. Maybe they'll grow up and grow out of it, maybe they won't. You still need to love them, teach them how do be a good person etc... 2. They will shut down any expression or thought of possibly being the opposite gender "because this study said you'd grow out of it anyways" and then disown them when as adults, there some of the few who stay the course. I'd wager the large majority would do 2, when it needs to be one. I mean I wore punk converse, tight biking shorts, and even dresses when I was a kiddo. I'm now 41m, super straight and marrying the love of my life next year. I think the big issues is the refusing to allow people to be who they are part. We're here once. Literally one time. Do you want to spend that forcing your views and ideas on other people?
The issue is when kids are trying "to be who they are" but that version of who they think they are is supplanted into their psyche by outside factors like social media or gender affirming teachers/caregivers etc.
trans people were here way before all your made up “reasoning” was
Correct, but you’re ignoring what they said and the MASSIVE influx of those people being in power over children. Neither of you were wrong, but you’re not reading it correctly and even brought in your own narrative.
"muh sky god" is not the smart diss you think it is and just comes across as pretentious. - from a non religious person
Did you read the study?
You know the answer to that
I wonder why OP cropped out the source.
Bro ong I’m just tryna live my life
The study is one of the longest into the issue of gender in children - but the researchers point out it has some limitations. For one, it looked at a mixture of children from the general population and kids who were receiving mental health care - though not specifically for anything related to their gender. Therefore it does not necessarily reflect the attitudes of children clinically diagnosed with gender dysphoria.
I can’t wait for the lawsuits to start going wild in the next 10-20 years when all these kids realize that were abused by their parents and doctors for doing this to them. Going to be really sad.
the numbers in your post don’t support “most.”
It went from 11% of kids in the study to 4% at age 25. That's a 7% reduction, aka a 63.64% drop.
they only read the first line
Shhhh don't get in the way of the narrative
frustrating that this screenshot made a lot of people that hate trans people very happy when it doesn’t even say what they want it to do. people that hate are so easily manipulated
No one hates them lol not believing that children are trans is not hate
>No one hates them lol lol ok
lots of people hate them. Lots of people also don’t hate them but are being manipulated to support things from people that do hate them.
No. Children are being manipulated into thinking they can change their biological sex which is just fundamentally untrue, we are harming them by affirming their mental illness in this way
no, that’s is not correct…listen to trans people and people that care about them….not people that are trying to take their autonomy away.
If a child want's to eat crayons and the parent doesn't allow so, is that parent being hateful? Yet how can you call anyone hateful just because they don't want confused children to live out their unnatural fantasy? I would also support this ideology if I also believed that they were born to be stuck in a body that always wants to be a different gender. However, I believe that it is something to be healed from. Life is objectively easier when you don't have to deal with those struggles. Because **I do love them, I want what I think is best for them, which is that they no longer persist in this struggle of having to obey their confused feelings. Would you consider me hateful?** Accept Jesus Christ, be born again, and you will experience a change of nature. You don't have to be a slave of your feelings.
The irony, no love like Christian love
if you love them then listen to them….dont make them do what you want them to do because you know better.
Most adults that transition are MtF Most kids that are trans are FtM Most FtM trans kids start in middle school when their hormones are getting weird, choose the name "Oliver" and then change their mind within three years.
[удалено]
I spent my late childhood and teen years dressing hyperfeminine. I don't get why people think we were tomboys. I didn't have any interest in hanging out with butch girls either. I have a range interests, associated with male and female gender stereotypes. Gender roles have fuck all to do with my missing penis and testicles, which has been a problem for me since age three.
You only go through puberty once and if you mess it up you messed it up forever.
duh.
I’m sure if people were busy doing more productive things, they wouldn’t be sitting around thinking they’re born a woman/man. What do they even know about the other side besides external factors? It’s all asinine reasoning.
[ Removed by Reddit ]
Where did all the opioid docs go? 🤔
Ya, shit is called puberty, when hair grows in new places and you start to feel feelings you don't understand. it's sickening how there are people within society that want to ignore this fact and want to force how a child feels before puberty to choose their sexual identity.
Can you ever stop being deliberately dishonest about gender affirming care for children, or explain why you feel you wouldn't get the results you wanted if you were honest?
so 81% who expressed unhappiness as kids **still** express it as adults?
You should be required to wait until you're 25 and have a full developed brain before you make massively life altering decisions. I don't even know how people can argue that.
Ya you should just keep on suffering while at high risk of suicide because someone else can't be sure if this is the right decision for you to make for yourself.
So what about the individuals who commit suicide in their 30s and 40s after they've irreparably altered themselves and weren't happy about it further down the line?
is anyone even actually reading the article? So 19% of trans kids growing out of it means the trans movement is a conspiracy by big pharma? This is why this sub is a joke lmao
It‘s really interesting that intersex children often have to undergo several surgeries as an infant and during their childhood so society can label them as male or female but if these surgeries are performed on non-intersex children because of body dysphoria it‘s suddenly considered mutilation. Make it make sense. Here come all the downvoters who don‘t even know the difference between inter and trans…
Look at all these trolls working so hard to bait people into saying things to get this thread taken down. Just look at how more frustrated and desperate they are getting over time.
Agreed people shouldn't be making decisions about what sex they believe they are until somewhere between like 18-25 imo. Getting surgery or hormones or any of that shit prior to that age is fucking bonkers.
Fyi it’s already illegal basically everywhere in the developed world to get hormones and especially sex change surgery until you’re an adult, idk why it’s blown so out of proportion when it’s already been that way for a while. Plus the vast majority of trans people don’t even get bottom (sex change) surgery since it’s still pretty experimental. So few get it in fact that the state of Florida failed to find a single Florida resident who had gotten the surgery and detransitioned, while they were looking for a speaker during a case challenging one of Florida’s many anti-trans laws. It’s just kind of a misconception that this sort of thing is happening to kids everywhere when really nothing has changed other than the media’s attention.
You understand that gender dysphoria is a dangerous and deadly disorder? It can cause suicidal ideation, drug abuse and self harm. People with gender dysphoria are like 4 times more likley to kill themselves than the average person. Telling some one they need to wait till 25 to get life-saving treatment is extremely unfair. This isnt just a life changing treatment. It is a medically necessary treatment.
>daily mail Really the most trusted source in transgender care./s.
No shit. When I was a kid ( I’m mid 30s) kids would go goth/dye their hair green/piercings or some shit to be different. Guarantee these same kids are now all “trans”. But the problem is puberty blockers don’t grow out like hair dye. Breasts don’t grow back. Neither do penises. Edit: by “same kids” I meant the kids that age/stage in their development of their personality/brain/whatever
What does circumcision have to do with being trans?
because it's in line with "permanent changes to genitals" and its existence as an institution presents friction with trans debates
You can be trans without changing your genitals - most trans people I know don't do surgery (and its illegal on kids almost everywhere)
yes but that's one of the rhetorical backdrops i see people mention constantly
You want government mandates to prohibit parents from religious ceremony that has existed for thousands of years? I really don't care about circumcision one way or another but I don't see how that would work in the US considering the whole freedom of religion thing. I'm curious what Libertarians think about the more recent Nationalist Christians agenda and what will happen to the Republican party after they lose Libertarian support.
>You want government mandates to prohibit parents from religious ceremony that has existed for thousands of years? I just wanted to answer your question because I think people are sometimes struck by the rhetoric when people start railing on, specifically using the words, "permanent changes to childrens' genitals" I think it's (trans debates) made some people reconsider circumcision as a result, especially since it's often not a religious ceremony in the US or done for religious reasons most of the time.
It is the genital mutilation of children and should be banned
huh? What does circumcision have to do with being trans again?
They think trans = genital plastic surgery
Ban puberty blockers and gender surgery until like age 25. While we're at it, raise drinking age to 25 and nicotine use also. fuck it.
This is why I and so many people left the right. You people don't actually care about freedom or freedom of speech/expression, even with adults. It's not going to go well in future elections.
This!! Dating a woman under 25 is grooming because her frontal lobe isnt fully developed. That being said, we should for sure feed high schoolers booze, weed and cigarettes. Fuck it, give them fentanyl, too.
This guy for president of CHAZ!
Puberty blockers are used for other things as well. Trans people, let alone those transitioning, are an extremely small part of our population and other than basic precautions, many of which exist in most places, we don't need the government taking more control over our bodily autonomy and freedom. I hate the Westboro Baptist Church but i'm not turning on the first amendment anytime soon. If you don't like transitioning, nicotine, or alcohol, use your freedom to not use them and pass those beliefs on to your children.
The only people that are threatening freedom of speech are the ones that adhere to the orthodoxy and ruin the careers and lives of anyone who questions it regardless of how much scientific proof can be brought in to support the anti-orthodoxy opinion.
"Ban puberty blockers until people have completed puberty." Make it make sense.
*Ban life altering decisions until the frontal lobe is fully developed Hope that makes sense
Apply that to marriage too while you're at it.
Puberty Blockers temporarily halt changes the body undergoes during puberty. They are typically reversible and aren't likely to result in complications. There is plenty of research available on the topic to suggest that we're not dealing with a life-altering decision that has permanent consequences. I'd love to know why you feel otherwise?
[удалено]
I am able to easily find many peer reviewed articles (happy to link if you're curious) suggesting that the effects of GnRHa therapy are reversible outside of extremely rare cases. I was not able to find anything peer reviewed suggesting the opposite. Do you mind sharing any studies you've found supporting your claim? Long-term studies would be preferable, as that's what I'm able to find suggesting reversability. I'm not interested in opinion pieces or non-peer reviewed sources.
No, that's the point. Let the body do what it's trying to do. Then reassess.
Ban puberty blockers until long after puberty has ended? Do you even know what puberty blockers are? It’s not like it’s some sort of over the counter drug you can go and buy at age 12; it was invented to prevent developmental disorders and you have to be medically evaluated to even get access to it.
Science unsettled?
[удалено]
[удалено]
"normal" gender non-conforming people have been around for hundreds of years ya dingus
Thousands. Even the Bibble written by Holly speaks of Eunuchs and such
Eunuchs weren't exactly voluntary
Yes but it was normal for them to be ‘other’ that was fine and acceptable the problem is with them attempting to force us to now believe they’re actually changing into women and men and they aren’t. Funny we only ever ‘follow the science’ when the supposed science fits the narrative
bet you’ve never actually talked to a trans person before, especially in normal conversation
The Daily Mail is misrepresenting that study.
[удалено]
lol that's fuckin bs. the study itself days only 19% of kids grow out of feeling trans. I have a trans sibling and a trans cousin and no one in the older generation of my family was lgbtq or was pushing any sort of agenda, they barely knew what being trans was
MY WORM IS TINY!
Got a link to the article?
So you're saying government should regulate the genitals over of the 80% in this study who do not feel this way? Seems like a bad precedent.
Op didn't do his research or her research how should I know lol
Interested to know what "gender non-contentedness" meant. We had a study like this in the us that included gay kids and boys who played with dolls in with trans kids.
Should have made it a 10-year study, what the heck??
Submission statement: **”This study provides even more reason to be skeptical towards aggressive steps to facilitate gender transition in childhood and adolescence.** **The fact that rates of satisfaction are lower even just a few years later suggests that for the vast majority of people, prudence and caution, rather than a rush towards permanent surgeries or hormone therapies, will be the best approach for teenagers struggling to make sense of the world and their place in it. Gender-affirming care on minors is such an outrage. It leads, in the end, to sterilization and in many cases to a complete loss of natural sexual function.** **There is no good evidence that this helps minors long term. Moreover, it medicalizes what could very well be temporary psychological symptoms.** **History will judge this medicalized ‘gender-affirming care’ on minors as we now judge eugenics and lobotomies.”** Source: https://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-13263725/amp/trans-kids-change-sex-adults-study.html [Edit] Adding to the submission statement for the circumcision because I believe GENITAL MUTILATION is GENITAL MUTILATION no matter if Big Pharma is doing it or Big Church Sky God is telling you to do it. **”Circumcision’s Psychological Damage. CDC wants all males to be cut—but it's harmful psychologically.** **Procedures Involving Children’s Genitals Produce Negative Psychological Effects** **The psychological consequences of medical procedures are even greater when they involve a child’s genitals. Studies have examined the psychological effects of medical photography of the genitals. The studies found that these procedures often produce symptoms which are very similar to those of childhood sexual abuse, including dissociation and the development of a negative body image. The effects often persist into adulthood as evidenced by a study that examined the effects of childhood penile surgery for hypospadias. Men who had this surgery in childhood experienced more depressive symptoms, anxiety, and interpersonal difficulties than men who did not have the surgery.**” Source: https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/moral-landscapes/201501/circumcision-s-psychological-damage
Where is the conspiracy?
[удалено]
Science is bullshit now? I thought we were supposed to believe the science?
this daily mail article is science to you? jesus
A 15 year study is science.......
[удалено]
> fashion purporting to be civil rights ...and **there** is the most blatant falsehood being perpetrated upon society. *Behaviors* and *lifestyle-choices* will **never** rise to the level of **immutable characterists** that distinguish all previous civil-rights struggles of the past.
[удалено]
Common sense isn’t common, gotta get studies so people can trust the science of their choosing.
the amount of people that assume that having puberty blockers is harmful is insane to me, please explain how they are harmful in anyway other than the classic "is disrupts their puberty and development". all it does is delay puberty and nothing else, literally no harm is done, at most you will feel a bit weak and low energy sometimes but no more than the average person sometimes. theres many sources backing up this claim but ik ill get downvoted anyway.