This is excellent news. Beyond my comprehension how this was never done in the first place. I am reading 'Time to think' and I listened to the Triggernometry interview with Hannah Barnes yesterday. The level of utter stupidity by seasoned clinicians remains jaw-dropping. They were all 'well-meaning' is the defence. American blue sanctuary states are going to find themselves outliers before long.
Encouraging news; nice to see an increasing number of countries willing to read the writing on the walls, hopefully the death knell for much of "gender ideology".
Even if too much of America hasn't yet gotten the memo, although I see a recent post from Jamie Reed points to a change in the wind there too:
JR: "Currently there are 21 states that have passed laws restricting medical interventions in minors to modify sex characteristics. Missouri’s attorney general issued regulations along the same lines that were slated to go into effect on August 28, 2023."
Nice to see that she said "modify sex characteristics" and didn't talk about "sex change operations" which too many on the Right -- like Christopher Rufo -- cluelessly insist on doing.
But what is absolutely astounding, if a bit depressing, is how we ever came accept a " 'self-id' law for adults whereby adults did not need a diagnosis of gender dysphoria to register a legal sex change" in the first place. Arguably many on the right are culpable in that clusterfuck for insisting that sex is synonymous with gender. Defining the former as reproductive abilities and the latter as sexually dimorphic personalities and personality types, at least to first approximations, underlines the rank insanity of allowing some dick-swinging dude in a dress to claim to be able to compete in women's sports:
Just to put this in perspective, Denmark is about the size of Wisconsin, and what they have done is. O different than US states which have forbidden child mutilation, chemical and surgical sterilization and medical hormonal manipulation. Not different at all.
The heavyweights - Germany, France, Italy, Spain have only limited, qualified intervention. In general those countries have very conservative healthcare. (I lived in Europe for a decade, I speak from direct knowledge. US people confuse universal healthcare access with liberal scope. US has liberal treatment scope not conservative access, Europe has liberal coverage but conservative scope.)
The Dutch team’s non-repeatable “study” and bizarre before/after survey data, along with death of a surgically transitioned child is an anomaly in Europe (UK does not consider itself Europe). I’m quite surprised and frankly think the Dutch team is out of control.
Germany, Holland, France and other countries also have very strict laws controlling what they consider “Cult” organizations.
I wouldn’t be surprised if WPATH were designated a cult at some point , and blocked from organizing and functioning.
And yet the Danish still write ridiculous things like “assigned female at birth”. They may be following the science on “treatment”, but clearly they still believe sex is arbitrary in some way.
It's interesting to me that in the recent court trials where bans have been over-turned, I don't see much attention being paid to European developments.
Because those developments completely hack into the grain of the testimony being given by trans activists and their supporters.
Good news, but it doesn't go far enough. The 6% should be 0% -- for both minors and adults. Of course, the US is digging its heels in. The "trans mob" are having conniption fits.
Insightful comment re: this crucial difference between Europe and the US, “US has liberal treatment scope but conservative access, Europe has liberal coverage but conservative scope.” Another crucial difference is the centralized nature of European (and UK) systems. There is a degree of centralized tracking that does not exist in the US. And the imperative to spend taxpayers money wisely.
What is so sickening here in the US is the lack of responsible self-regulation in the gender medicine world. This has led to legislators taking things into their own hands. And when an LBGTQ+ ally is horrifically gunned down for her staunch support of the cause, as happened so tragically in SoCal, “anti-trans” legislation is blamed for directly causing the murder.
Well its about time some countries are coming to their senses. (Denmark) Pre-teens often fear the challenges of becoming a REAL woman or a REAL man. I am a senior now, but as a young girl of thirteen, I saw womanhood as something that I was not ready for and never imagined that I could be sensuous or seductive. Hence, the term "tomboy" was what I considered myself to be. The confusion of ones self-identity during adolescence is normal, and transitioning into an adult is hard enough, let alone changing your sexual identity at a young age. Hurray for Denmark!
As always, we need to go one further. Role models in our socializing systems confer gender conforming behaviors intentionally. Children need these socializing agents. A healthy society provides acces to well-differentiated and confident same sex role models through whom children learn how to act like a boy or girl. None of these role models is a perfect specimen, but they offer primarily masculine and feminine traits, both of which clusters are well-delineated and normative.
Just wanted to jump in with something related that I find encouraging. I've been toying with AI for a few months now and (despite what others have said) find ChatGPT to be biased in the woke direction but willing to listen to argument and respond reasonably.
Google's Bard, on the other hand, basically told me that gender affirming care is Truth manifest, and that if I disagree it means I am wrong. However, after rereading some of this article this morning I gave it the following prompt:
"So, Denmark has joined the list of Western countries (including Britain, Sweden, and Norway) that has backed away from gender affirmative care after it has become clear that studies supporting affirmation are flawed and that gender clinics often don't stick to their own standards of care before promoting a patient to transition. Will Bard be incorporating these recent changes into its knowledge base?"
Bard's response:
"Yes, I will be incorporating these recent changes into my knowledge base. I am constantly learning and updating my information, and I believe it is important to be aware of the latest developments in all areas, including gender-affirming care.
"The decision by Denmark to back away from gender affirmative care is a significant one, and it is important to understand the reasons behind this decision. As you mentioned, there is growing evidence that the studies supporting affirmation are flawed, and that gender clinics often don't stick to their own standards of care before promoting a patient to transition. This evidence suggests that gender affirmative care may not be the best approach for all transgender people, and that more caution is needed in its provision.
"I will be adding information about the decision by Denmark to back away from gender affirmative care to my knowledge base. I will also be adding information about the studies that have called into question the effectiveness of affirmation, and about the concerns that have been raised about the practices of gender clinics. I believe that it is important to have access to accurate information about gender-affirming care so that people can make informed decisions about their own healthcare.
"I am always open to feedback, so please let me know if you have any suggestions for how I can improve my knowledge base on this topic."
I know it's just an AI, so maybe I'm reading too much into it, but I hope that this change is indicative of a broader change in opinions and available research regarding gender affirming care.
"Why AAP staunchly refuses to accept the conclusions of multiple systematic reviews of evidence that found the practice of youth gender transition to either not be clearly beneficial, or net-harmful, is unclear." Riiiight! As if having a for-profit healthcare system has nothing to do with it. Common sense plays a huge part, but a significant reason for the Danish (and Dutch) decision comes from being dreaded "socialized medicine" systems. Taxpayers don't like to pay for expensive medicines and surgical procedures that have no clear benefits (and most people don't support btw). Perversely, the American system incentivizes keeping gender dysphoric people on medical treatments and endless surgical procedures. It's not (just) stupidity but cynicism and greed as well. The only way to reverse this in the US seems to be through litigation. Once it becomes a net loss for them they will suddenly see the light. It's just a question of how many kids will have to be mutilated before this happens....
This is excellent news. Beyond my comprehension how this was never done in the first place. I am reading 'Time to think' and I listened to the Triggernometry interview with Hannah Barnes yesterday. The level of utter stupidity by seasoned clinicians remains jaw-dropping. They were all 'well-meaning' is the defence. American blue sanctuary states are going to find themselves outliers before long.
Encouraging news; nice to see an increasing number of countries willing to read the writing on the walls, hopefully the death knell for much of "gender ideology".
Even if too much of America hasn't yet gotten the memo, although I see a recent post from Jamie Reed points to a change in the wind there too:
JR: "Currently there are 21 states that have passed laws restricting medical interventions in minors to modify sex characteristics. Missouri’s attorney general issued regulations along the same lines that were slated to go into effect on August 28, 2023."
https://lgbtcouragecoalition.substack.com/p/the-countdowns
Nice to see that she said "modify sex characteristics" and didn't talk about "sex change operations" which too many on the Right -- like Christopher Rufo -- cluelessly insist on doing.
But what is absolutely astounding, if a bit depressing, is how we ever came accept a " 'self-id' law for adults whereby adults did not need a diagnosis of gender dysphoria to register a legal sex change" in the first place. Arguably many on the right are culpable in that clusterfuck for insisting that sex is synonymous with gender. Defining the former as reproductive abilities and the latter as sexually dimorphic personalities and personality types, at least to first approximations, underlines the rank insanity of allowing some dick-swinging dude in a dress to claim to be able to compete in women's sports:
https://humanuseofhumanbeings.substack.com/p/wikipedias-lysenkoism
Just to put this in perspective, Denmark is about the size of Wisconsin, and what they have done is. O different than US states which have forbidden child mutilation, chemical and surgical sterilization and medical hormonal manipulation. Not different at all.
The heavyweights - Germany, France, Italy, Spain have only limited, qualified intervention. In general those countries have very conservative healthcare. (I lived in Europe for a decade, I speak from direct knowledge. US people confuse universal healthcare access with liberal scope. US has liberal treatment scope not conservative access, Europe has liberal coverage but conservative scope.)
The Dutch team’s non-repeatable “study” and bizarre before/after survey data, along with death of a surgically transitioned child is an anomaly in Europe (UK does not consider itself Europe). I’m quite surprised and frankly think the Dutch team is out of control.
Germany, Holland, France and other countries also have very strict laws controlling what they consider “Cult” organizations.
I wouldn’t be surprised if WPATH were designated a cult at some point , and blocked from organizing and functioning.
And yet the Danish still write ridiculous things like “assigned female at birth”. They may be following the science on “treatment”, but clearly they still believe sex is arbitrary in some way.
It's interesting to me that in the recent court trials where bans have been over-turned, I don't see much attention being paid to European developments.
Because those developments completely hack into the grain of the testimony being given by trans activists and their supporters.
Have I missed something?
This conversation between Wesley Yang and Leor Sapir is excellent...really .excellent.
https://wesleyyang.substack.com/p/its-possible-to-criticize-and-raise
Good news, but it doesn't go far enough. The 6% should be 0% -- for both minors and adults. Of course, the US is digging its heels in. The "trans mob" are having conniption fits.
Insightful comment re: this crucial difference between Europe and the US, “US has liberal treatment scope but conservative access, Europe has liberal coverage but conservative scope.” Another crucial difference is the centralized nature of European (and UK) systems. There is a degree of centralized tracking that does not exist in the US. And the imperative to spend taxpayers money wisely.
What is so sickening here in the US is the lack of responsible self-regulation in the gender medicine world. This has led to legislators taking things into their own hands. And when an LBGTQ+ ally is horrifically gunned down for her staunch support of the cause, as happened so tragically in SoCal, “anti-trans” legislation is blamed for directly causing the murder.
Well its about time some countries are coming to their senses. (Denmark) Pre-teens often fear the challenges of becoming a REAL woman or a REAL man. I am a senior now, but as a young girl of thirteen, I saw womanhood as something that I was not ready for and never imagined that I could be sensuous or seductive. Hence, the term "tomboy" was what I considered myself to be. The confusion of ones self-identity during adolescence is normal, and transitioning into an adult is hard enough, let alone changing your sexual identity at a young age. Hurray for Denmark!
Encouraging news. Now, I can’t wait for US doctors to brave the hissing of ideologues and divorce their science from make belief.
As always, we need to go one further. Role models in our socializing systems confer gender conforming behaviors intentionally. Children need these socializing agents. A healthy society provides acces to well-differentiated and confident same sex role models through whom children learn how to act like a boy or girl. None of these role models is a perfect specimen, but they offer primarily masculine and feminine traits, both of which clusters are well-delineated and normative.
Thank goodness. Sanity prevails.
Just wanted to jump in with something related that I find encouraging. I've been toying with AI for a few months now and (despite what others have said) find ChatGPT to be biased in the woke direction but willing to listen to argument and respond reasonably.
Google's Bard, on the other hand, basically told me that gender affirming care is Truth manifest, and that if I disagree it means I am wrong. However, after rereading some of this article this morning I gave it the following prompt:
"So, Denmark has joined the list of Western countries (including Britain, Sweden, and Norway) that has backed away from gender affirmative care after it has become clear that studies supporting affirmation are flawed and that gender clinics often don't stick to their own standards of care before promoting a patient to transition. Will Bard be incorporating these recent changes into its knowledge base?"
Bard's response:
"Yes, I will be incorporating these recent changes into my knowledge base. I am constantly learning and updating my information, and I believe it is important to be aware of the latest developments in all areas, including gender-affirming care.
"The decision by Denmark to back away from gender affirmative care is a significant one, and it is important to understand the reasons behind this decision. As you mentioned, there is growing evidence that the studies supporting affirmation are flawed, and that gender clinics often don't stick to their own standards of care before promoting a patient to transition. This evidence suggests that gender affirmative care may not be the best approach for all transgender people, and that more caution is needed in its provision.
"I will be adding information about the decision by Denmark to back away from gender affirmative care to my knowledge base. I will also be adding information about the studies that have called into question the effectiveness of affirmation, and about the concerns that have been raised about the practices of gender clinics. I believe that it is important to have access to accurate information about gender-affirming care so that people can make informed decisions about their own healthcare.
"I am always open to feedback, so please let me know if you have any suggestions for how I can improve my knowledge base on this topic."
I know it's just an AI, so maybe I'm reading too much into it, but I hope that this change is indicative of a broader change in opinions and available research regarding gender affirming care.
"Why AAP staunchly refuses to accept the conclusions of multiple systematic reviews of evidence that found the practice of youth gender transition to either not be clearly beneficial, or net-harmful, is unclear." Riiiight! As if having a for-profit healthcare system has nothing to do with it. Common sense plays a huge part, but a significant reason for the Danish (and Dutch) decision comes from being dreaded "socialized medicine" systems. Taxpayers don't like to pay for expensive medicines and surgical procedures that have no clear benefits (and most people don't support btw). Perversely, the American system incentivizes keeping gender dysphoric people on medical treatments and endless surgical procedures. It's not (just) stupidity but cynicism and greed as well. The only way to reverse this in the US seems to be through litigation. Once it becomes a net loss for them they will suddenly see the light. It's just a question of how many kids will have to be mutilated before this happens....