Transgender people who start hormones as teenagers rather than adults 'have better mental health’

Doodledog

I sympathised with the predicament of someone who has very unusual physiology, which on the one hand gives her the advantage in sport when running against women, but in the other results in the fairness of allowing her to do so coming into question.

Her race is, to my mind, irrelevant. Perhaps you could explain why you drag her race into every post where she is mentioned?

Well it is an issue for black women athletes Doodledog. I've posted many links to articles about it. My intersectional feminism recognises the discrimination faced by black women athletes and yes their race matters. Ignoring it isn't an option for me.
www.aclu.org/news/racial-justice/simone-biles-shacarri-richardson-and-how-the-olympics-failed-black-women/
edition.cnn.com/2021/08/02/sport/misogynoir-black-women-athletes-cmd-spt-intl/index.html
www.salon.com/2021/07/06/shacarri-richardson-black-women-olympics-mis

trisher

^I have replied to three of your posts in a row now. Are you planning to engage with my post of 10.08?^
Well "no" because it's the usual straw man argument.

With which parts of my post do you disagree?

By the way if you don't understand that the example of Caster Semenya, taken apart from her race, is truly an example of how women's bodies can be exploited, examined and regulated by an organisation, and how dangerous it is to set standards for what is, or isn't, a woman based on dodgy scientific information, how that leads only to discrimination, and the warnings that can be extrapolated from that, should any such standards ever be universally applied, I can only say think about it.

Trisher doesn’t answer my posts. Should I consider myself cancelled by her?

trisher

By the way if you don't understand that the example of Caster Semenya, taken apart from her race, is truly an example of how women's bodies can be exploited, examined and regulated by an organisation, and how dangerous it is to set standards for what is, or isn't, a woman based on dodgy scientific information, how that leads only to discrimination, and the warnings that can be extrapolated from that, should any such standards ever be universally applied, I can only say think about it.

We're back to Sojourner Truth's 'Ain't I a woman' speech, aren't we?

Who gets to define what a woman is? The patriarchy. As is amply demonstrated here.

I have already said that I sympathise with what must be an awful situation. I do so on a human level, and don’t try to score points by dragging in her race, or use the situation as a basis on which to accuse others of racism.

Those with a dsd have begged not to be dragged into this discussion. Begged. But that's just ignored. And again CS has one of five conditions which stop them from participating in womens sports.

The black woman athlete referred to higher up this thread, Caster Semenya, isn’t a trans woman.
She’s intersex, meaning her physical appearance is female, but her chromosomes are male, XY. That’s why she has high levels of testosterone.
So the question of her competing in women’s sport has nothing to do with racism or transphobia.
It’s a genetic problem.
Surely you knew that, Trisher?

Galaxy

Those with a dsd have begged not to be dragged into this discussion. Begged. But that's just ignored. And again CS has one of five conditions which stop them from participating in womens sports.

And who decided they couldn't compete Galaxy? These decisions are only taken to regulate women that is the point.

janeainsworth

The black woman athlete referred to higher up this thread, Caster Semenya, isn’t a trans woman.
She’s intersex, meaning her physical appearance is female, but her chromosomes are male, XY. That’s why she has high levels of testosterone.
So the question of her competing in women’s sport has nothing to do with racism or transphobia.
It’s a genetic problem.
Surely you knew that, Trisher?

Janeainsworth I've posted several links to the voices of black women athletes if you choose not to listen to them that is entirely up to you. Caster Semenya has lived as a woman. identifies as a woman and competed as a woman until the rules were changed. If she takes a drug she can compete again but she has refused to do so.
It's a woman problem. It's a black problem. It's a regulating women's bodies problem.

Mollygo

Trisher doesn’t answer my posts. Should I consider myself cancelled by her?

Did you ask me something I must have missed it. Still it is difficult to keep pace. Doodledog demands answers to certain posts so do you. Forgive me. I'm not entirely certain why you feel the need to be cancelled, am I supposed to assure you you aren't? There- you aren't.

There has actually been a lot of studies into transgender mental health, what a huge wealth of information all in one place

whatweknow.inequality.cornell.edu/topics/lgbt-equality/what-does-the-scholarly-research-say-about-the-well-being-of-transgender-people/

Did you ask me something I must have missed it. Still it is difficult to keep pace. Doodledog demands answers to certain posts so do you.
No, I don't 'demand' anything. What is the difference between your saying :

Just pretend I'm as stupid and ignorant as you believe Doodledog and post your answer again please. I must have missed it.

and my saying:

I have replied to three of your posts in a row now. Are you planning to engage with my post of 10.08?

Apart from the aggression and hostile, unpleasant tone in yours, that is? As many have said, the nastiness on this thread is not coming form the so-called 'gender critical' posters.

And your recurring mention CS is so obviously meant as a trap. You have used her before, conflating trans issues, race and sex into the case of one very unusual person who is in an unfortunate position because of her biology. Her case is so unusual that it is a case of 'bad cases not making good law', but you have no scruples about dragging her into your attempts to score points.

Thanks VioletSky lots of information and research most of it concluding transition is a positive experience. Of course there are exceptions and each is a sad experience for someone, but the majority are happier. What more could anyone want?

trisher we definitely need more support to ensure that mistakes aren't made but I am hopeful that will lessen over time.

The thing that makes me saddest is the parents who are unsupportive, the person inside is still the same even if manner and means of expression change

And your recurring mention CS is so obviously meant as a trap. You have used her before, conflating trans issues, race and sex into the case of one very unusual person who is in an unfortunate position because of her biology. Her case is so unusual that it is a case of 'bad cases not making good law', but you have no scruples about dragging her into your attempts to score points.
And there you have complete misrepresentation of the facts.
Caster is not a single case simply the rallying point for a whole range of black women athletes I have chosen to support.
I have posted why I find her treatment unacceptable. Disagree with that by all means but stop trying to attribute to me any other motive than these.
I am an intersectional feminist. I recognise some women are discriminated against more than others. I recognise Caster Semenya as a rallying point for black women athletes. I support them and oppose the discrimination they face. I realise that regulation of women's bodies leads to inequality and intrusion and I oppose that regulation.
I am not scoring points I am simply following the requirements of intersectional feminism and opposing discrimination. Just because it's not my body being examined and regulated doesn't mean it's not my battle. It very much is.

You would hope VioletSky that all parents would want their child to be happy and support them, but sadly (as I think you know too well) there are always people who don't do that. I do hope the wider community will also help and provide support when it is needed. It isn't the same but it would help.

I'll return to the original post.
The statistics quoted are nonsensical.

Odds of severe psychological distress were reduced by 222 per cent, 153 per cent and 81 per cent for those who began hormones in early adolescence, late adolescence and adulthood, respectively.

Odds of feeling suicidal in the previous year were 135 per cent lower in those who began hormones in early adolescence, 62 per cent lower in those who began in late adolescence and 21 per cent lower in those who began as adults, compared with the control group.

You cannot lower or reduce anything by more than 100% because at that point you have reduced to zero. These figures are inflated and therefore meaningless. It casts doubt on the veracity of the entire study.

I'm extremely concerned about giving cross sex hormones to children. To say the effects are largely reversible is very subjective. Which effects can be reversed, which can't? Kiera Bell and Sinead Watson, two de-transitioners are both left with irreversible effects despite not taking testosterone for any great length of time, and neither took it as a child. Once the vocal cords have thickened and taken the voice down to the men's range they can never thin again to revert to female pitch. Both suffer with a degree of facial hair which is permanent. The masculine changes to the facial features may soften but will not entirely disappear. Is a 14 year old really mature enough to properly way up this risk? When there was heated discussion about Shamima Begum and her wish to return to the UK, one of the points repeatedly made was that she was 15 when she went to join Isis, a child, incapable of making adult decisions. Children with levels of body dysphoria that prompt thoughts of transitioning need support and counselling to fully examine any underlying causes. Social transition is easily reversed, chemical transition is not. Puberty is essential not just for maturation of the sex organs but also for brain development.

I realise after this thread how strong the influences and the regulations and even the norms of patriachy still are. I include myself in this. I was raised to discuss, argue and express my opinion as loudly and vociferously as I could. It's something I do almost without thinking.
However my feminst friends are slowly disuading me from taking that route. State your opinion, give your reasons and then get out of there is basically what I need to learn. So having given my opinions and my reasons I am leaving the thread. Think what you like believe what you wish. Try not to attribute things to me, motives or opinions I haven't expressed. But if you do so don't expect a response. There isn't going to be any victory, there isn't going to be a consensus, nobody wins.

Since I've mostly been absent from the thread I started, I don't blame you trisher. But I agree about the power of the patriarchy, even amongst those who call themselves feminists.

I will continue to post and start threads. I accept the gender critical patriarchists will derail again and again. But I won't shut up. That is their objective and I'm not giving in to them.

trisher

You would hope VioletSky that all parents would want their child to be happy and support them, but sadly (as I think you know too well) there are always people who don't do that. I do hope the wider community will also help and provide support when it is needed. It isn't the same but it would help.

And here we go again with the sly digs and insinuations that those who disagree are reprehensible. We've been accused of being racist, antifeminist, unprofessional, unable to determine context, and now we are bad parents.

If you engaged with our points (specifically that the OP study has more holes than the spout of a watering can) instead of these hostile and unpleasant digs, maybe the thread would move on a bit?

From the very start (the lie that I said that support for trans issues was populist) this thread has been a systematic attack on so-called 'gender critical' feminists who have dared to question the study.

trisher and Gagjo I understand, I've had many things attributed to me that I don't think or feel and haven't said.

Perhaps by leaving this thread it will get to stand and later readers without preconceived notions will be able to read and see the truth for themselves.

trisher

I realise after this thread how strong the influences and the regulations and even the norms of patriachy still are. I include myself in this. I was raised to discuss, argue and express my opinion as loudly and vociferously as I could. It's something I do almost without thinking.
However my feminst friends are slowly disuading me from taking that route. State your opinion, give your reasons and then get out of there is basically what I need to learn. So having given my opinions and my reasons I am leaving the thread. Think what you like believe what you wish. Try not to attribute things to me, motives or opinions I haven't expressed. But if you do so don't expect a response. There isn't going to be any victory, there isn't going to be a consensus, nobody wins.

The thing is, trisher, that you refuse to engage when people try to meet you half way.

Upthread, I said the following (I have had to remove the spacing to quote it properly, so I apologise if that makes it more difficult to read):
The fact that transpeople have always been with us is true, but not relevant to whether or not they are women in the true sense of the word. I'm not sure how I can compromise. I mean, I am happy to accept transwomen as they are. If one joined the WI or the NWR, or the Ladies' knitting circle (assuming I belonged to any of these things) I would happily include her. I would use her preferred name and gender and lend her my lipstick if I wore it. None of that is meant to sound flippant - I just don't grasp the 'live as a woman' thing in that sense. Nevertheless I am not phobic or anti-trans. I can't prove that on here, but it is true. What I can't accept is that someone with male gametes is a woman, or that they should be able to compete with women in sport and so on, or insist that the language should change to accommodate them, as doing so eradicates women. That is simply not fair, and I don't understand why that compromise can't come from the TRAs?

You responded to this with snide comments about 'crying on the Quayside', and gloating about how the language has changed and people with my beliefs can take it or leave it.

The difference between what I posted there and your POV seems to be that I don't believe that TWAW, and never will, as to do so is going against the science. Changing the language so that 'women' means 'women and men who want to 'live as' women' will not alter the science.

But otherwise, what is it that I, or others, have said that is deserving of the hostility and attacks on this thread? We disagree that TWAW, and that 'living as a woman' is possible these days, although I have said that I understand the gist of that if not the detail. That's all there is to it. Our behaviour towards transpeople is probably exactly the same.

There is no need for personal slurs, name calling or aggression, and as far as I remember without going back through 19 pages of posts, none of that has come from those who disagree with your stance.

I want you to keep posting gagajo. I absolutely dont want you to shut up gagajo. Please show where I have said otherwise

GagaJo

Since I've mostly been absent from the thread I started, I don't blame you trisher. But I agree about the power of the patriarchy, even amongst those who call themselves feminists.

I will continue to post and start threads. I accept the gender critical patriarchists will derail again and again. But I won't shut up. That is their objective and I'm not giving in to them.

You flatter yourself GJ. Who has asked you to give in or stop posting?
Untruths like ‘gender critical patriarchy’ where the gender critical posters on here are female make your posts weird. The patriarchy are those who want to erode female rights, not those of us who support those many trans who do not have that as their objective.