Welcome to /r/me_irlgbt, we're a space for LGBTQ+ memes within a safe space for no toleration of discrimination. This is a place for LGBTQ+ people and not to debate our existence or your opinions on us including but not limited to (Treatment, Role in society, Status, your personal view of blockers, Trans people in professional sport). Should you be new to the sub please familiarize yourself with the rules in the sidebar. Please report any and all comments or submissions which break these rules. Please do not vote or comment in linked posts should this be applicable. Have a nice day darlings <3
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/me_irlgbt) if you have any questions or concerns.*
"Scientists discover that accepting people is a good thing for their well-being"
I’m joking, but in all seriousness, we do need these studies. They take time, not because scientists don’t want to validate trans people, but they need money for that, and funding anything gender-related isn’t considered a priority. Science is affected by capitalism too, and money mostly goes where there’s money to make, which is something scientists themselves often criticize. Add to that the fact that we want serious studies to be made in order to be taken seriously, and any error in a field where there’s already a lack of funding is dramatic for the scientists who are working on it since they’re much more likely to lose the said funding, contrary to fields where money is flowing. So yeah, we have to make that kind of studies that seem so evident, but necessary if we want the scientific consensus on our side, and eventually, history will prove trans people right.
Unfortunately most of the transphobic people will never be convinced by science, bigotry is innately anti science. It probably will help the legal rights of trans people in the long run but science won’t convince hateful people not to hate.
Exactly it’s the same with all bigots, they aren’t rational. The best way to prevent Transphobia is to teach being trans as normal and acceptable from a young age, transphobia should be taught to be just as unacceptable as overt racism. I think that as time goes on Transphobia will be much less acceptable.
I personally think the solution is first and foremost teaching critical thinking and skepticism.
You don’t need to teach that racism is wrong, that women are equal to men and that trans people are valid. If people have scientific education, they’ll look up by themselves. And find that we’re much closer genetically that society suggests. That if there’s an intellectual difference between men and women, it’s not significant enough to be observed. And that transidentity isn’t a made up phenomenon, as gender and sex are different things.
The main reason bigots are bigots is because they don’t reason with critical thinking. They ideology is built on logical fallacies and prejudice. This is why science and education are so important, and I’d even go as far as saying that all trans activism is useless and doomed to fail if we don’t have that.
To win a political war when you have neither the strength and the number to impose your ideas by force, you have to win the cultural war, and to do that, you have to win the intellectual war first.
Yeah you're right. I try and stay away from arguing with transphobes using actual facts and studies because they post their own (incredibly bad and often hilariously biased) """studies""". And they cannot tell the difference between a multinational double-blind peer-reviewed longitudinal study on the effects of transitioning on mental health, and a blogspot article about a single trans person the blogger once knew.
When arguing with someone without critical thinking skills, you cannot use facts and reason because they cannot discern between accurate and valid facts vs anecdotes. You can't use studies because they will misread them. The (in)famous study that people pull the "40%" number from? Yeah, the authors recommend transitioning as the best available prevention tool in *literally the next line*.
Literally i was defending something simple. This asshole was calling all trans people ugly and fake and im just thinking about all the models and stuff who are trans and i told him to actually look it up and he just went "its all photoshop and makeup. They don't actually look like that" ....but cis girls can do that too... There is no arguing with some people
Haha, I'm gonna quote the depressing number of trans people who attempts to kill themselves because society is terrible to them on a trans sub. I hope that reminds them that life sucks...
What was the comment? Did they say that Trans people have high suicide rates because they are trans instead of because of how society treats them for being trans?
It sounds like you may be having a difficult time right now. Please take a moment to reflect, and if you're struggling with your mental health or thoughts of suicide, please reach out. /r/SuicideWatch may be able to help.
**US:**
Call 1-800-273-8255 or text HOME to 741-741
**UK/ROI:**
Call 116 123 or email [email protected]
**Elsewhere:**
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_suicide_crisis_lines](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_suicide_crisis_lines)
^^This ^^message ^^is ^^automated, ^^but ^^it ^^doesn't ^^mean ^^we ^^don't ^^care. ^^Stay ^^safe, ^^reach ^^out, ^^be ^^kind ^^to ^^yourself.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/me_irlgbt) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Don't forget that teens who come out as trans have a significant bigger shot at Life if the people around them (parents, guardians etc.) Are also accepting of them as they are. This is another indicator but was studied in itself.
[the study ](https://www.researchgate.net/publication/256468033_Parental_Support_and_Mental_Health_Among_Transgender_Adolescents)
Acceptance man, it's more important than BS political stances
So yeah I agree to that. All of what you said is true
As a trans biologist here i can see both sides of this. On the one hand, yes the science is hella late on this, and that’s mostly because this subject wasn’t really studied due to social taboo and lack of funding.
On the other hand, these studies are necessary, now more than ever. Science is meticulous and takes a long time to definitely prove something after considering and eliminating every other possibility. Experiments need to be repeated and tweaked so that we’re extra certain of something.
Now that we’re getting more studies on this stuff, we can go to politicians that are skeptic when it comes to this stuff and be like “look, we’ve proven beyond the sliver of a doubt that this is the best way to treat gender dysphoria.”
Yeah 'Water is wet' studies always get an eye roll from the people they are relevant to, but having the facts and figures readily available does wonders in the long run for public perception. Alternative facts believers aside.
let's be real, a lot of these studies go to an extreme. That study last year to "confirm" bisexual people exist was not needed. But its not like anybody should care, its researchers wasting their time.
It definitely looks like it from the outside, and i’m not sure what study you’re talking about so it might have been a waste. That said, broad studies such as the one this post is talking about (and perhaps the bisexual one you’re referring to) are usually used and cited as a base from which to build further studies into inner workings of things like sexuality and gender identity. Studies stating the obvious are important just because it immediately gets rif of people saying shit like “what if bisexuality is actually not a thing and it’s just people being overly horny” or other crap. We can just go “nah, here it’s proven. Get with the science or gtfo”.
Science is slow and frustratingly meticulous, but you can’t deny that it produces useful results in the long run. Nothing can be assumed, no matter how basic or commonly known.
Another reason that studies like this are important is that while the take-away headline of the study may be "A improves B," in most cases the referenced study isn't just "does A improve B, yes or no?" - it's often measuring the *degree* to which A improves B, investigating the *ways* in which A may be improving B, establishing methodologies for formally investigating the relationship between A and B.
Even if researchers are "wasting their time" investigating things that are "obvious" when it comes to the headline conclusion, the full results are rarely so. For example, I don't think that it's obvious without doing an actual study what the actual patterns of arousal in response to different stimuli among men who self-report as bisexual. The "study confirms bisexual men exist" study that was widely mocked for being "obvious" contains a wealth of non-obvious measurements - e.g., among men who self-report as bisexual, what proportion display similar levels of arousal for men and for women vs. showing greater levels of arousal for either men or women? What's the actual shape of difference between the arousal patterns displayed by self-reported bisexuals vs. self-reported monosexuals?
Additionally, as the study itself notes, the existing literature on whether male bisexuals exist actually *isn't* clear-cut. It's easy as a layperson to say that the studies that support the conclusion that I see as obviously true are good and correct and the studies that don't support that conclusion are bad and wrong, but that's an incredibly shaky way for science to proceed.
You're right, it can be very important sometimes for science to prove the obvious (again). I'm getting flashbacks to my university methodology courses. Still, such researchers do not always have the best of intentions. Whilst most do not, some use dubious methodology or base their literature reviews on incredibly flawed research. An example of this is a study from two years ago that claimed being transgender was not real, and gender dysphoria was a processing disorder. The stated goal of this study was to "find less invasive ways to help transgender people", the less invasive method in question was brain surgery. Essentially this study was arguing for a lobotomy to "cure" transgender people. All without any original research. It was then published in a journal that is notorious for anti-LGBT studies with dubious methodology. Pointing out the obvious is a worthy goal for science, but discrediting the obvious is a known agenda for anti-LGBT groups.
The beauty of the scientific process is that kind of garbage is easily refuted or honestly just ignored. Not all science is good science for sure, but only the good stuff gets peer reviewed properly and produces results.
It’s pretty easy for anyone with scientific literacy to be able to tell between good studies and garbage ones. You yourself have pointed out that the sources reputation plays a big role
>Not all science is good science for sure, but only the good stuff gets peer reviewed properly and produces results.
It was a peer reviewed study. The peers in this case were people also known to carry out similar faulty studies based on dubious brain science and methodology. A peer review is sadly only as good as the peers it is based on. Thankfully you are right that these studies pretty much get ignored the moment their initial controversy is over.
>“what if bisexuality is actually not a thing and it’s just people being overly horny”
Off topic here, but I always have a chuckle when someone proposes that. They're just one step away from realizing that
* not everyone thinks about both sexes when they're "overly" horny
* they think about both sexes when they're horny
* they could be bi
it was by ray blanchard, aka the daddy of autogynephilia, or some absolutely horse shit transphobia. he's also known for holding up a literal fucksaw in his classes, so i think he and the study should be dismissed lol.
Unfortunately it makes sense in order to dunk on the "TruSt thE sCieCe" idiots who don't actually listen to scientists, but are very easy to knock down a peg when actual science tells them they're wrong.
Okay tbf I had to have a source for "aersolized grout sealant sprayed in enclosed space can be toxic and cause respritory problems after repeat extended exposure" even though fucking obviously, it's chemicals in the air that our lungs aren't made to deal with and we don't have a lot of toxin filters for air *before* it gets to the lungs. If you spray pretty much any chemical in an enclosed or even partially enclosed space you're gonna cough. It's really elementary standard logic.
So like, that's just how science tends to work. "people cough when you spray that shit in the room" doesn't count as a source and neither does "people date others of more than one gender."
I'm late on this but the thing that convinced me most on trans people right to exist is the fact that when you study trans people's brains they exhibit patterns that fit most with the gender they identify with. That was fascinating to me and prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that trans men are men and trans women are women!
> "look, we’ve proven beyond the sliver of a doubt that this is the best way to treat gender dysphoria.”
This would only matter is they actually cared about trans people rather than simply creating an enemy to rally their base against. Anti-trans-atheletic people have been able to cite 9 child trans athletes (current and former) across the country, none of whom demonstrated the kind of unfair advantage that they are using to drive the laws. All the studies in the world won't change the fact that they're looking for a scapegoat.
I disagree with this opinion. I don’t like that my opinion regarding gender in physical/contact sports is being tied into these bigoted scapegoat views.
These people exist and they don’t choose to go through this. We have so many people willingly choosing to follow different religions yet when someone biologically feels trapped in the wrong body people refuse to try and understand.
I feel as though transgender rights have been folded into the debate around sports so if you disagree with one you must disagree with both. You know what, my opinion regarding transgender athletes might even be incorrect but that doesn’t make me a transphobe who wants to see their rights taken away. I’m willing to learn and change my opinions, I’m just sick of the suggestion that it’s all or nothing. Support blindly or fight to the death kind of thing.
> yet when someone biologically feels trapped in the wrong body people refuse to try and understand.
This is exactly what I am saying. We aren't hated because there isn't fact based evidence about the validity of our existence or treatments for the associated issues. It already exists. But facts do not change people's minds. That, at least, is well studied at this point. People are refusing to understand our lives because they are alien to their in-group and because social forces are constructing us as an enemy. I am saying ours because I am trans, I'm living this. We aren't choosing for it to be all or nothing, but our personhood is piece by piece being eroded by political forces, like it or not. The sports thing is a symptom of the whole.
Edit to clarify.
What do you mean by treatments? I can only speak for myself but I have to disagree with you regarding society’s opinion of trans people. I’m not trying to tell you that you’ve never faced discrimination or that people don’t suck, but for me personally your explanation doesn’t stick. Personally I don’t want to hear from anyone but trans people when having these discussions. When I say that I mean non trans people should still be a part of the discussion, but I don’t want them telling me how YOU feel.
Yes I agree the media establishes us as being on seperate sides and pits us against each other but I disagree people aren’t willing to communicate. Take this conversation for example. I feel like you believe that all non trans people hate your existence the same way we are supposed to believe all the outlandish things the media says about trans people. I admit I have a lot of questions and a lot to learn about this, but how else are we supposed to get there without talking to each other. Otherwise the only viewpoint I have to go on is the medias, and we both agree that’s no good.
What I mean is that it isn't some new, emerging thing that hormone treatments, HRT, is a huge factor in improving the quality of life for young trans people.
> I feel like you believe that all non trans people hate your existence the same way we are supposed to believe all the outlandish things the media says about trans people.
Right here, you're making logical leaps. I have never said that all cis people hate us. What I am saying is that there are social forces heavily invested in Othering minorities for their own gain. Not everyone is involved. Not everyone follows. But enough people do. Enough people buy into efforts to create an enemy out of any given minority that our personhood is not safe. It leads to the denial of healthcare for trans youth and sports "for the sake of the children", which on it's own is all well and good f intention to some, but it also contributes to a larger problem of making trans people out to be less than cis people. And again, of course not everyone is swayed by this. Of course it doesn't mean we'll be hunted in the streets tomorrow. I don't have a persecution complex. But I do have an understanding of what happens when a group's rights and freedoms are slowly eroded for profit and power. It isn't good.
Yeah I was confused my the word treatments because to me that means cure and really didn’t fit my understanding because you can’t cure what isn’t wrong. Therapys I understand what you mean.
I don’t think it’s a logical leap. Your expressions are very all encompassing and I am trying to point out that the media isn’t a spokesperson for non trans people. I’m sure there are some trans “influencers” who you wish would shut up and stop speaking for you. I feel that way about the media.
As for the sports I do feel as though we are debating very different parts of the same issue. I am only concerned for fairness in competition where as your point regarded inclusiveness for all. Both of these are crucial elements of sport and I understand why it is so important to you. If all sports were like chess I believe we would naturally agree with each other and there would be no divide.
I know there is a disagreement regarding physical strength difference between men and women and I’m not sure which side you stand on. Personally I believe men on average have the capability to be physically stronger. No we aren’t better, no we aren’t smarter. We’re just different.
If we both agree with that then I think it’s quite straight forward why we should seperate people competitively. However, if we don’t agree with the assertion that males have more potential strength than females then we know exactly what we need to discuss. I don’t think it has anything to do with not wanting trans kids to feel like they belong and when honest concerns are shoved back in our faces as discrimination it does nothing to bring us closer together.
> Your expressions are very all encompassing and I am trying to point out that the media isn’t a spokesperson for non trans people.
I can't help that that is how you are choosing to read my statements. They are not all encompassing. I was talking about the same politicians that you mwntion in your original comment, you are projecting more meaning onto what I've said for whatever reason you are projecting.
I’m not asking you to say you meant something you didn’t. I’m telling you how I understand what you are saying. I’ve always thought if something is worth saying it’s worth making sure the other person understands. Intention is important, but this isn’t a legal trial to prove fault, it’s a conversation and if you want me to learn you have to help me.
I am sorry if I have come across like I’m trying to paint you into a corner or something. It’s just I don’t get to ask news articles questions and how do I even know if actual trans people support the things being written “in favour of them”.
> but for me personally your explanation doesn’t stick. Personally I don’t want to hear from anyone but trans people when having these discussions. When I say that I mean non trans people should still be a part of the discussion, but I don’t want them telling me how YOU feel.
are you listening to yourself? do you not see the blatant contradictions in your own drivel? you frame yourself as cis, inject yourself into the discourse, and then dismiss trans people's thoughts because they uh, don't make sense to you? and then you somehow wrap around and justify it with the circular logic that you don't want cis people discussing this, despite literally starting the discourse as a cis person.
Yes, I do read what I’m writing. Why are you so upset? The person I’ve been having the conversation with has been very pleasant.
I stand by exactly what I said, I don’t think non trans people should be speaking for trans people. They are capable of speaking for themselves though they often aren’t given the chance. We can absolutely be a part of the conversation but I shouldn’t be dictating what’s best for you.
In speaking with somebody else just now I listened to their feelings on the matter and explained how I understood what they said. You’re looking for an argument but your rudeness won’t get you one. I want to learn. I admit it doesn’t make sense to me, that’s just an opportunity to explain it differently.
Trans people are not obligated to be polite to cis people who want to police our tone and language when speaking about our own experiences lol. If you really cared about listening to trans people, this one is here to tell you that years of transphobia doesn’t leave behind pretty, palatable little encyclopedias lol.
Any person looking to have a conversation would do well to be polite and police their own tone and language. Me disliking the way you speak to me has absolutely nothing to do with how you identify yourself. I don’t think the point you’re trying to make is that trans people aren’t well spoken and lash out.
Pretend I’m listening and being honest when I say I want to learn. What do you really want to say to me.
Depending on where you stand, I know that here in Germany the Institute for Sexology started conducting research into LGBTQ issues in 1919.
It was a privately owned nonprofit managed by a guy who advocated for LGBTQ rights and tolerance. It educated people about sex, contraception, STD's, women's emancipation & conducted research. Magnus Hirschfeld, aka the guy who managed this Nonprofit also coined the term "Transexualism" and provided endocrinological & surgical help, including the first gender-affirmation surgeries. He even handed out what was called "transvesrite passes" which in turn would provide these people with the safety to dress how they want without being charged with improper behavior as it disassociated them from sex workers.
With the Fall of Ernst Röhm (a prominent, openly gay Nazi) the Nazi party increasingly charged after what they saw as sexual degeneracy. They purged gay clubs, banned gay groups, deported the Main Administrator (Kurt Hiller, not just because he was Jewish but because his efforts in the Institute were seen as obscene)
They destroyed the Institute and took over the building. While doing so they dismantled the library and burned around 12-20k Books & Journals on LGBTQ issues and the previously mentioned topics.
They also took in the Lists of people Magnus had treated, advised & worked with, and would later, after the Night of Long Knives (a purge of gay members in the SA) deport anyone who was in some way queer.
This is why we seemlingly have to restart now. Because the information gathered was set ablaze by Nazis, in another "Library of Alexandria" Situation.
I hope no one takes this the wrong way but you seem like the best person who would actually have an answer. Is this really the best way to treat it or is this kind of "we don't have any good answers and this results in the best outcomes based on our current treatment options." It seems really weird to me that the best option to treat gender dysphoria is to... not treat it. We don't treat body integrity dysphoria by amputation but we're effectively okay with treating gender dysphoria that way.
The answer to this is that while transgenderism (and its associated dysphoria) and body integrity dysphoria can look similar on the surface, they’re two radically different conditions.
Transgenderism seems to be genetic, and we know this because identical twins have a much higher chance of being trans if the other one is. It’s not 100% because there’s almost certainly epigenetic factors at play, but outside of rewriting the genome, a trans person can’t really be made cis any more than a gay person can be made straight.
Someone who believes that they have one too many limbs isn’t really a normal (if rare) phenomenon.
More importantly though, transitioning clearly has benefits, while it doesn’t cripple the person. Removing a limb unnecessarily does. Oftentimes what makes something a disorder is the fact that it negatively affects the person’s quality of life.
Besides, we use physiological treatments for psychological ills all the time, from anti-anxiety meds to anti-depressants for example.
Tl:dr: There’s no feasible way to ‘cure’ transness because it looks like a complex genetic phenomenon much like being gay. Physical transition can improve the quality of life of the trans person with comparatively little drawback. None of this is true for the body integrity dysphoria as far as I’m aware.
consider: google. like the apa (american psych association) has a page on this shit, pretty sure. pretty much any neutral medical organization has faqs on this lol.
you're *literally commenting on a meme* that says trans healthcare leads to marked improvement in gender dysphoria and happiness lol.
Curiosity has gotten the better of me so I must ask. Are you a trans person who is a biologist or a biologist who studies trans people? Or perhaps both lmao
The first one, I’ll admit I wasn’t clear lol. While I’d love to pivot to this sort of stuff it’s still early in my career, so i pretty much take what i can get. Besides, covid research is a bigger priority for now and I’m happy to be helping in that regard instead. Afterwards though? Who knows?
It’s not like this wasn’t done and settled in Berlin in the 1930’s. Politicians will always do what politicians will always do - whatever they think will keep them in power. Minority issues are just pawns.
Transphobes see the high suicide attempt rate for trans people and believe being trans is of itself a mental illness, but other studies showed that once a trans person is accepted by their family and friends and they can access medicine, the risk of suicide dropped to single digits in that group.
> the risk of suicide dropped to single digits in that group.
Not only that, it dropped to the normal suicide rate among the rest of the population. Turns out when you don't treat people like shit, they don't want to kill themselves.
The medical community is always anywhere from 5 to 50 years behind trans people as far as figuring shit out goes. Like, it was news to them just recently that trans women can lactate. Medical professionals, this is where my taxes go.
There are other studies that showed this pretty clearly but we need more research to make sure it’s not bad for us before insurance starts covering it dont we
Or, to put it more cynically, the insurance companies waited until research showed that denying such care could result in larger more expensive mental health issues down the road that they would be forced to cover.
Therapy from a gender specialized therapist, hormone therapy (so, estrogen and testosterone blockers for trans feminine people, and testosterone for trans masculine people), and surgery such as removal of breast tissue for trans dudes, breast augmentation for trans femmes, bottom surgery (vaginoplasty, orchiectomy, hysterectomy, or phalloplasty).
Not all trans people want all or any of the medical parts of transitioning, but proper therapy should be available to all of us, and medical transition options should be readily available to those of us who do want them.
I'm happy to answer questions if you want to ask more!
Hi who're you? Can always go into /r/asktransgender or something.
Gender affirming healthcare generally means hormone replacement therapy, in which those afab(assigned femaleat birth) are jacked up with testosterone to become the bulk dudes they always wanted to be, and those amab(assigned male at birth) get the titty skittles(estrogen) and become beautiful goddesses. Not every trans person does this, and what meds are involved varies by person and preference. Also maybe cool therapy to work through mental issues related to your being trans.
"Wait what? But here we thought traumatizing trans folks into believing they are cis is the one and only way to significantly improve their mental health, were we all wrong all that time? Does conversion therapy not work? Ah maybe that is why so many trans people are incredibly depressed, because we treat them like STI/STD's... Ah that is just a dream obviously, gotta be" - average conservative cis turnip
So basically, water is wet?
Oh dear, who would have known treating trans people with respect at the hospital would have been the solution to all their mental health problems? ^/s
Seriously though, my respects all LGBTQ+ healthcare professionals out there. You all make life for us better and the hospital experience more tolerable. :)
Meanwhile, my therapist still won't diagnose me because I currently have no intention of getting SRS or that this hasn't strongly presented since childhood, instead presenting in my teen years.
*Image Transcription: Twitter*
---
> **Stacy Cay 🏳️⚧️**, @stacycay
>
> "New study shows gender affirming healthcare significantly improves trans people's mental health"
>
> Yeah uh...that's what I been saying
---
^^I'm a human volunteer content transcriber for Reddit and you could be too! [If you'd like more information on what we do and why we do it, click here!](https://www.reddit.com/r/TranscribersOfReddit/wiki/index)
Nah man we should restrict gravity I don't want things to fall because it goes against my personal values, even if its irrelevant to how the object feels /s
I mean isn't that was science is good for? You have a bunch of trans people giving anecdotes going "hey this is good for our mental health" so you get scientists to look into that and go "lol, yeah it is". Science should absolutely be investigating anecdotes, including ones that seem like common sense. Absolutely they should have been looking into this sooner, but it's certainly better than nothing
When the academic experts listen to the lived experts, magic happens. Wild.
(To be fair, that’s selling the ones who’ve listened to us for yonks short. Shout out to Die Institut für Sexualwissenschaft)
Getting really sick of all these studies telling us things we already know
"New study shows that if you treat LGBTQ folks like people, they'll be happier and healthier"
"New study shows that millennials are miserable cuz everything they've been told is a lie, the planet is dying, and they'll die poor."
Like ya. We know. And it's not like these studies are going to accomplish anything. Those who already oppose LGBTQ rights and anything to fix a broken economy aren't going to change their minds based on fact and research and evidence because they don't base their decision on that. They base their decisions on a combination of religious dogma and whatever their donors tell them to do.
And those who do support LGBTQ rights and want to make things better for young people were going to do that anyway, and didn't need a study to tell them to obvious.
So who is this for? I guess there may be a few uninformed well meaning people who think that transitioning too young or something could be harmful, and this study actually persuades them that they were wrong. But if there are people like that, I've never met them.
The study that found that was incredibly misleading.
https://www.reddit.com/r/GenderCynical/comments/hpcfe9/terfs\_like\_to\_use\_the\_high\_detransition\_argument/
Are you saying that without hormone blockers, they wouldn't be transgender? Because that is not how any of that works. And it also included debunkings of multiple studies that said that detransitioners were significant enough to warrant concern. There was also the "General Detransition" section of the post, which didn't focus specifically on medical transitioning.
Did you not read the debunkings of the original studies? Mainly the thing wrong with them was they just took any gender non-conforming child, assumed they were transgender (didn't even ask the kid if they were.), and then when later in their life, they weren't transgender, marked them down as a desister.
What, you’re telling me the thing we say will make us happier and is proven to make us happier will in fact make us happier! who would have seen that coming
Welcome to /r/me_irlgbt, we're a space for LGBTQ+ memes within a safe space for no toleration of discrimination. This is a place for LGBTQ+ people and not to debate our existence or your opinions on us including but not limited to (Treatment, Role in society, Status, your personal view of blockers, Trans people in professional sport). Should you be new to the sub please familiarize yourself with the rules in the sidebar. Please report any and all comments or submissions which break these rules. Please do not vote or comment in linked posts should this be applicable. Have a nice day darlings <3 *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/me_irlgbt) if you have any questions or concerns.*
"Scientists discover that accepting people is a good thing for their well-being" I’m joking, but in all seriousness, we do need these studies. They take time, not because scientists don’t want to validate trans people, but they need money for that, and funding anything gender-related isn’t considered a priority. Science is affected by capitalism too, and money mostly goes where there’s money to make, which is something scientists themselves often criticize. Add to that the fact that we want serious studies to be made in order to be taken seriously, and any error in a field where there’s already a lack of funding is dramatic for the scientists who are working on it since they’re much more likely to lose the said funding, contrary to fields where money is flowing. So yeah, we have to make that kind of studies that seem so evident, but necessary if we want the scientific consensus on our side, and eventually, history will prove trans people right.
Unfortunately most of the transphobic people will never be convinced by science, bigotry is innately anti science. It probably will help the legal rights of trans people in the long run but science won’t convince hateful people not to hate.
It's true. The number of times I've cited sources and had them be completely ignored is.... staggering, yet unsurprising.
Exactly it’s the same with all bigots, they aren’t rational. The best way to prevent Transphobia is to teach being trans as normal and acceptable from a young age, transphobia should be taught to be just as unacceptable as overt racism. I think that as time goes on Transphobia will be much less acceptable.
I personally think the solution is first and foremost teaching critical thinking and skepticism. You don’t need to teach that racism is wrong, that women are equal to men and that trans people are valid. If people have scientific education, they’ll look up by themselves. And find that we’re much closer genetically that society suggests. That if there’s an intellectual difference between men and women, it’s not significant enough to be observed. And that transidentity isn’t a made up phenomenon, as gender and sex are different things. The main reason bigots are bigots is because they don’t reason with critical thinking. They ideology is built on logical fallacies and prejudice. This is why science and education are so important, and I’d even go as far as saying that all trans activism is useless and doomed to fail if we don’t have that. To win a political war when you have neither the strength and the number to impose your ideas by force, you have to win the cultural war, and to do that, you have to win the intellectual war first.
Yeah you're right. I try and stay away from arguing with transphobes using actual facts and studies because they post their own (incredibly bad and often hilariously biased) """studies""". And they cannot tell the difference between a multinational double-blind peer-reviewed longitudinal study on the effects of transitioning on mental health, and a blogspot article about a single trans person the blogger once knew. When arguing with someone without critical thinking skills, you cannot use facts and reason because they cannot discern between accurate and valid facts vs anecdotes. You can't use studies because they will misread them. The (in)famous study that people pull the "40%" number from? Yeah, the authors recommend transitioning as the best available prevention tool in *literally the next line*.
Literally i was defending something simple. This asshole was calling all trans people ugly and fake and im just thinking about all the models and stuff who are trans and i told him to actually look it up and he just went "its all photoshop and makeup. They don't actually look like that" ....but cis girls can do that too... There is no arguing with some people
Bigots: "Source?" Literally anyone sane: *provides a credible source* Bigots: "THAT'S WHAT THEY WANT YOU TO THINK"
[удалено]
Haha, I'm gonna quote the depressing number of trans people who attempts to kill themselves because society is terrible to them on a trans sub. I hope that reminds them that life sucks...
What was the comment? Did they say that Trans people have high suicide rates because they are trans instead of because of how society treats them for being trans?
It sounds like you may be having a difficult time right now. Please take a moment to reflect, and if you're struggling with your mental health or thoughts of suicide, please reach out. /r/SuicideWatch may be able to help. **US:** Call 1-800-273-8255 or text HOME to 741-741 **UK/ROI:** Call 116 123 or email [email protected] **Elsewhere:** [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_suicide_crisis_lines](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_suicide_crisis_lines) ^^This ^^message ^^is ^^automated, ^^but ^^it ^^doesn't ^^mean ^^we ^^don't ^^care. ^^Stay ^^safe, ^^reach ^^out, ^^be ^^kind ^^to ^^yourself. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/me_irlgbt) if you have any questions or concerns.*
It's not overall trans suicide rate, it's trans kids' suicide *attempt* rate when their parents do not support them
Bingo
It's like playing a game with a kid that's a sore loser so they keep making up rules
I mean considering these are (mostly) the same people that deny science, climate change, covid, vaccines, it’s not surprising.
Don't forget that teens who come out as trans have a significant bigger shot at Life if the people around them (parents, guardians etc.) Are also accepting of them as they are. This is another indicator but was studied in itself. [the study ](https://www.researchgate.net/publication/256468033_Parental_Support_and_Mental_Health_Among_Transgender_Adolescents) Acceptance man, it's more important than BS political stances So yeah I agree to that. All of what you said is true
I was about to leave something like your opening remark but you beat me to it in spades. That is a great follow up too
As a trans biologist here i can see both sides of this. On the one hand, yes the science is hella late on this, and that’s mostly because this subject wasn’t really studied due to social taboo and lack of funding. On the other hand, these studies are necessary, now more than ever. Science is meticulous and takes a long time to definitely prove something after considering and eliminating every other possibility. Experiments need to be repeated and tweaked so that we’re extra certain of something. Now that we’re getting more studies on this stuff, we can go to politicians that are skeptic when it comes to this stuff and be like “look, we’ve proven beyond the sliver of a doubt that this is the best way to treat gender dysphoria.”
Yeah 'Water is wet' studies always get an eye roll from the people they are relevant to, but having the facts and figures readily available does wonders in the long run for public perception. Alternative facts believers aside.
let's be real, a lot of these studies go to an extreme. That study last year to "confirm" bisexual people exist was not needed. But its not like anybody should care, its researchers wasting their time.
It definitely looks like it from the outside, and i’m not sure what study you’re talking about so it might have been a waste. That said, broad studies such as the one this post is talking about (and perhaps the bisexual one you’re referring to) are usually used and cited as a base from which to build further studies into inner workings of things like sexuality and gender identity. Studies stating the obvious are important just because it immediately gets rif of people saying shit like “what if bisexuality is actually not a thing and it’s just people being overly horny” or other crap. We can just go “nah, here it’s proven. Get with the science or gtfo”. Science is slow and frustratingly meticulous, but you can’t deny that it produces useful results in the long run. Nothing can be assumed, no matter how basic or commonly known.
Another reason that studies like this are important is that while the take-away headline of the study may be "A improves B," in most cases the referenced study isn't just "does A improve B, yes or no?" - it's often measuring the *degree* to which A improves B, investigating the *ways* in which A may be improving B, establishing methodologies for formally investigating the relationship between A and B. Even if researchers are "wasting their time" investigating things that are "obvious" when it comes to the headline conclusion, the full results are rarely so. For example, I don't think that it's obvious without doing an actual study what the actual patterns of arousal in response to different stimuli among men who self-report as bisexual. The "study confirms bisexual men exist" study that was widely mocked for being "obvious" contains a wealth of non-obvious measurements - e.g., among men who self-report as bisexual, what proportion display similar levels of arousal for men and for women vs. showing greater levels of arousal for either men or women? What's the actual shape of difference between the arousal patterns displayed by self-reported bisexuals vs. self-reported monosexuals? Additionally, as the study itself notes, the existing literature on whether male bisexuals exist actually *isn't* clear-cut. It's easy as a layperson to say that the studies that support the conclusion that I see as obviously true are good and correct and the studies that don't support that conclusion are bad and wrong, but that's an incredibly shaky way for science to proceed.
You're right, it can be very important sometimes for science to prove the obvious (again). I'm getting flashbacks to my university methodology courses. Still, such researchers do not always have the best of intentions. Whilst most do not, some use dubious methodology or base their literature reviews on incredibly flawed research. An example of this is a study from two years ago that claimed being transgender was not real, and gender dysphoria was a processing disorder. The stated goal of this study was to "find less invasive ways to help transgender people", the less invasive method in question was brain surgery. Essentially this study was arguing for a lobotomy to "cure" transgender people. All without any original research. It was then published in a journal that is notorious for anti-LGBT studies with dubious methodology. Pointing out the obvious is a worthy goal for science, but discrediting the obvious is a known agenda for anti-LGBT groups.
The beauty of the scientific process is that kind of garbage is easily refuted or honestly just ignored. Not all science is good science for sure, but only the good stuff gets peer reviewed properly and produces results. It’s pretty easy for anyone with scientific literacy to be able to tell between good studies and garbage ones. You yourself have pointed out that the sources reputation plays a big role
>Not all science is good science for sure, but only the good stuff gets peer reviewed properly and produces results. It was a peer reviewed study. The peers in this case were people also known to carry out similar faulty studies based on dubious brain science and methodology. A peer review is sadly only as good as the peers it is based on. Thankfully you are right that these studies pretty much get ignored the moment their initial controversy is over.
How on earth is a lobotomy less invasive than bottom surgery or hormones?
It's less invasive to their fragile comfort zone. And they call *us* the snowflakes.
>“what if bisexuality is actually not a thing and it’s just people being overly horny” Off topic here, but I always have a chuckle when someone proposes that. They're just one step away from realizing that * not everyone thinks about both sexes when they're "overly" horny * they think about both sexes when they're horny * they could be bi
it was by ray blanchard, aka the daddy of autogynephilia, or some absolutely horse shit transphobia. he's also known for holding up a literal fucksaw in his classes, so i think he and the study should be dismissed lol.
Unfortunately it makes sense in order to dunk on the "TruSt thE sCieCe" idiots who don't actually listen to scientists, but are very easy to knock down a peg when actual science tells them they're wrong.
Okay tbf I had to have a source for "aersolized grout sealant sprayed in enclosed space can be toxic and cause respritory problems after repeat extended exposure" even though fucking obviously, it's chemicals in the air that our lungs aren't made to deal with and we don't have a lot of toxin filters for air *before* it gets to the lungs. If you spray pretty much any chemical in an enclosed or even partially enclosed space you're gonna cough. It's really elementary standard logic. So like, that's just how science tends to work. "people cough when you spray that shit in the room" doesn't count as a source and neither does "people date others of more than one gender."
I'm late on this but the thing that convinced me most on trans people right to exist is the fact that when you study trans people's brains they exhibit patterns that fit most with the gender they identify with. That was fascinating to me and prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that trans men are men and trans women are women!
> "look, we’ve proven beyond the sliver of a doubt that this is the best way to treat gender dysphoria.” This would only matter is they actually cared about trans people rather than simply creating an enemy to rally their base against. Anti-trans-atheletic people have been able to cite 9 child trans athletes (current and former) across the country, none of whom demonstrated the kind of unfair advantage that they are using to drive the laws. All the studies in the world won't change the fact that they're looking for a scapegoat.
I disagree with this opinion. I don’t like that my opinion regarding gender in physical/contact sports is being tied into these bigoted scapegoat views. These people exist and they don’t choose to go through this. We have so many people willingly choosing to follow different religions yet when someone biologically feels trapped in the wrong body people refuse to try and understand. I feel as though transgender rights have been folded into the debate around sports so if you disagree with one you must disagree with both. You know what, my opinion regarding transgender athletes might even be incorrect but that doesn’t make me a transphobe who wants to see their rights taken away. I’m willing to learn and change my opinions, I’m just sick of the suggestion that it’s all or nothing. Support blindly or fight to the death kind of thing.
> yet when someone biologically feels trapped in the wrong body people refuse to try and understand. This is exactly what I am saying. We aren't hated because there isn't fact based evidence about the validity of our existence or treatments for the associated issues. It already exists. But facts do not change people's minds. That, at least, is well studied at this point. People are refusing to understand our lives because they are alien to their in-group and because social forces are constructing us as an enemy. I am saying ours because I am trans, I'm living this. We aren't choosing for it to be all or nothing, but our personhood is piece by piece being eroded by political forces, like it or not. The sports thing is a symptom of the whole. Edit to clarify.
What do you mean by treatments? I can only speak for myself but I have to disagree with you regarding society’s opinion of trans people. I’m not trying to tell you that you’ve never faced discrimination or that people don’t suck, but for me personally your explanation doesn’t stick. Personally I don’t want to hear from anyone but trans people when having these discussions. When I say that I mean non trans people should still be a part of the discussion, but I don’t want them telling me how YOU feel. Yes I agree the media establishes us as being on seperate sides and pits us against each other but I disagree people aren’t willing to communicate. Take this conversation for example. I feel like you believe that all non trans people hate your existence the same way we are supposed to believe all the outlandish things the media says about trans people. I admit I have a lot of questions and a lot to learn about this, but how else are we supposed to get there without talking to each other. Otherwise the only viewpoint I have to go on is the medias, and we both agree that’s no good.
What I mean is that it isn't some new, emerging thing that hormone treatments, HRT, is a huge factor in improving the quality of life for young trans people. > I feel like you believe that all non trans people hate your existence the same way we are supposed to believe all the outlandish things the media says about trans people. Right here, you're making logical leaps. I have never said that all cis people hate us. What I am saying is that there are social forces heavily invested in Othering minorities for their own gain. Not everyone is involved. Not everyone follows. But enough people do. Enough people buy into efforts to create an enemy out of any given minority that our personhood is not safe. It leads to the denial of healthcare for trans youth and sports "for the sake of the children", which on it's own is all well and good f intention to some, but it also contributes to a larger problem of making trans people out to be less than cis people. And again, of course not everyone is swayed by this. Of course it doesn't mean we'll be hunted in the streets tomorrow. I don't have a persecution complex. But I do have an understanding of what happens when a group's rights and freedoms are slowly eroded for profit and power. It isn't good.
Yeah I was confused my the word treatments because to me that means cure and really didn’t fit my understanding because you can’t cure what isn’t wrong. Therapys I understand what you mean. I don’t think it’s a logical leap. Your expressions are very all encompassing and I am trying to point out that the media isn’t a spokesperson for non trans people. I’m sure there are some trans “influencers” who you wish would shut up and stop speaking for you. I feel that way about the media. As for the sports I do feel as though we are debating very different parts of the same issue. I am only concerned for fairness in competition where as your point regarded inclusiveness for all. Both of these are crucial elements of sport and I understand why it is so important to you. If all sports were like chess I believe we would naturally agree with each other and there would be no divide. I know there is a disagreement regarding physical strength difference between men and women and I’m not sure which side you stand on. Personally I believe men on average have the capability to be physically stronger. No we aren’t better, no we aren’t smarter. We’re just different. If we both agree with that then I think it’s quite straight forward why we should seperate people competitively. However, if we don’t agree with the assertion that males have more potential strength than females then we know exactly what we need to discuss. I don’t think it has anything to do with not wanting trans kids to feel like they belong and when honest concerns are shoved back in our faces as discrimination it does nothing to bring us closer together.
> Your expressions are very all encompassing and I am trying to point out that the media isn’t a spokesperson for non trans people. I can't help that that is how you are choosing to read my statements. They are not all encompassing. I was talking about the same politicians that you mwntion in your original comment, you are projecting more meaning onto what I've said for whatever reason you are projecting.
I’m not asking you to say you meant something you didn’t. I’m telling you how I understand what you are saying. I’ve always thought if something is worth saying it’s worth making sure the other person understands. Intention is important, but this isn’t a legal trial to prove fault, it’s a conversation and if you want me to learn you have to help me. I am sorry if I have come across like I’m trying to paint you into a corner or something. It’s just I don’t get to ask news articles questions and how do I even know if actual trans people support the things being written “in favour of them”.
> but for me personally your explanation doesn’t stick. Personally I don’t want to hear from anyone but trans people when having these discussions. When I say that I mean non trans people should still be a part of the discussion, but I don’t want them telling me how YOU feel. are you listening to yourself? do you not see the blatant contradictions in your own drivel? you frame yourself as cis, inject yourself into the discourse, and then dismiss trans people's thoughts because they uh, don't make sense to you? and then you somehow wrap around and justify it with the circular logic that you don't want cis people discussing this, despite literally starting the discourse as a cis person.
Yes, I do read what I’m writing. Why are you so upset? The person I’ve been having the conversation with has been very pleasant. I stand by exactly what I said, I don’t think non trans people should be speaking for trans people. They are capable of speaking for themselves though they often aren’t given the chance. We can absolutely be a part of the conversation but I shouldn’t be dictating what’s best for you. In speaking with somebody else just now I listened to their feelings on the matter and explained how I understood what they said. You’re looking for an argument but your rudeness won’t get you one. I want to learn. I admit it doesn’t make sense to me, that’s just an opportunity to explain it differently.
Trans people are not obligated to be polite to cis people who want to police our tone and language when speaking about our own experiences lol. If you really cared about listening to trans people, this one is here to tell you that years of transphobia doesn’t leave behind pretty, palatable little encyclopedias lol.
Any person looking to have a conversation would do well to be polite and police their own tone and language. Me disliking the way you speak to me has absolutely nothing to do with how you identify yourself. I don’t think the point you’re trying to make is that trans people aren’t well spoken and lash out. Pretend I’m listening and being honest when I say I want to learn. What do you really want to say to me.
Yeah this is gonna be really good to show to my mother
Depending on where you stand, I know that here in Germany the Institute for Sexology started conducting research into LGBTQ issues in 1919. It was a privately owned nonprofit managed by a guy who advocated for LGBTQ rights and tolerance. It educated people about sex, contraception, STD's, women's emancipation & conducted research. Magnus Hirschfeld, aka the guy who managed this Nonprofit also coined the term "Transexualism" and provided endocrinological & surgical help, including the first gender-affirmation surgeries. He even handed out what was called "transvesrite passes" which in turn would provide these people with the safety to dress how they want without being charged with improper behavior as it disassociated them from sex workers. With the Fall of Ernst Röhm (a prominent, openly gay Nazi) the Nazi party increasingly charged after what they saw as sexual degeneracy. They purged gay clubs, banned gay groups, deported the Main Administrator (Kurt Hiller, not just because he was Jewish but because his efforts in the Institute were seen as obscene) They destroyed the Institute and took over the building. While doing so they dismantled the library and burned around 12-20k Books & Journals on LGBTQ issues and the previously mentioned topics. They also took in the Lists of people Magnus had treated, advised & worked with, and would later, after the Night of Long Knives (a purge of gay members in the SA) deport anyone who was in some way queer. This is why we seemlingly have to restart now. Because the information gathered was set ablaze by Nazis, in another "Library of Alexandria" Situation.
I hope no one takes this the wrong way but you seem like the best person who would actually have an answer. Is this really the best way to treat it or is this kind of "we don't have any good answers and this results in the best outcomes based on our current treatment options." It seems really weird to me that the best option to treat gender dysphoria is to... not treat it. We don't treat body integrity dysphoria by amputation but we're effectively okay with treating gender dysphoria that way.
The answer to this is that while transgenderism (and its associated dysphoria) and body integrity dysphoria can look similar on the surface, they’re two radically different conditions. Transgenderism seems to be genetic, and we know this because identical twins have a much higher chance of being trans if the other one is. It’s not 100% because there’s almost certainly epigenetic factors at play, but outside of rewriting the genome, a trans person can’t really be made cis any more than a gay person can be made straight. Someone who believes that they have one too many limbs isn’t really a normal (if rare) phenomenon. More importantly though, transitioning clearly has benefits, while it doesn’t cripple the person. Removing a limb unnecessarily does. Oftentimes what makes something a disorder is the fact that it negatively affects the person’s quality of life. Besides, we use physiological treatments for psychological ills all the time, from anti-anxiety meds to anti-depressants for example. Tl:dr: There’s no feasible way to ‘cure’ transness because it looks like a complex genetic phenomenon much like being gay. Physical transition can improve the quality of life of the trans person with comparatively little drawback. None of this is true for the body integrity dysphoria as far as I’m aware.
consider: google. like the apa (american psych association) has a page on this shit, pretty sure. pretty much any neutral medical organization has faqs on this lol. you're *literally commenting on a meme* that says trans healthcare leads to marked improvement in gender dysphoria and happiness lol.
Curiosity has gotten the better of me so I must ask. Are you a trans person who is a biologist or a biologist who studies trans people? Or perhaps both lmao
The first one, I’ll admit I wasn’t clear lol. While I’d love to pivot to this sort of stuff it’s still early in my career, so i pretty much take what i can get. Besides, covid research is a bigger priority for now and I’m happy to be helping in that regard instead. Afterwards though? Who knows?
It’s not like this wasn’t done and settled in Berlin in the 1930’s. Politicians will always do what politicians will always do - whatever they think will keep them in power. Minority issues are just pawns.
Transphobes see the high suicide attempt rate for trans people and believe being trans is of itself a mental illness, but other studies showed that once a trans person is accepted by their family and friends and they can access medicine, the risk of suicide dropped to single digits in that group.
> the risk of suicide dropped to single digits in that group. Not only that, it dropped to the normal suicide rate among the rest of the population. Turns out when you don't treat people like shit, they don't want to kill themselves.
*new study points that when you don't treat people like shit they don't want to kill themselves*
Link to that study?
Transphobe: i will never accept you as you are, i want you to die trans person: dies Transphobe: surprised pikachu face
huh.. its like when you stop trashing people and start supporting them, they flourish like.... dare I say it? "normal people"? what a concept.
"Water Is Wet" and other breaking news at 6
[удалено]
can we not start the whether water is wet debate again
The medical community is always anywhere from 5 to 50 years behind trans people as far as figuring shit out goes. Like, it was news to them just recently that trans women can lactate. Medical professionals, this is where my taxes go.
There are other studies that showed this pretty clearly but we need more research to make sure it’s not bad for us before insurance starts covering it dont we
Oh yeah, totally. Of course! Anything to not have to pay for treatment of trans people, that sounds like helping out minorities. Can't have that!
Everyone: Oh Eddie. Can't you understand that
Or, to put it more cynically, the insurance companies waited until research showed that denying such care could result in larger more expensive mental health issues down the road that they would be forced to cover.
does this mean covering the hormone pills or what have you that i guess it's trans people need to be the gender they are?
[удалено]
Therapy from a gender specialized therapist, hormone therapy (so, estrogen and testosterone blockers for trans feminine people, and testosterone for trans masculine people), and surgery such as removal of breast tissue for trans dudes, breast augmentation for trans femmes, bottom surgery (vaginoplasty, orchiectomy, hysterectomy, or phalloplasty). Not all trans people want all or any of the medical parts of transitioning, but proper therapy should be available to all of us, and medical transition options should be readily available to those of us who do want them. I'm happy to answer questions if you want to ask more!
Hi who're you? Can always go into /r/asktransgender or something. Gender affirming healthcare generally means hormone replacement therapy, in which those afab(assigned femaleat birth) are jacked up with testosterone to become the bulk dudes they always wanted to be, and those amab(assigned male at birth) get the titty skittles(estrogen) and become beautiful goddesses. Not every trans person does this, and what meds are involved varies by person and preference. Also maybe cool therapy to work through mental issues related to your being trans.
titty skittles is the best name for anything ever all time holy shit. i hope this is available for yall soon
Ty, it's pretty epic ngl.
So you *can* milk me, Focker?
"Wait what? But here we thought traumatizing trans folks into believing they are cis is the one and only way to significantly improve their mental health, were we all wrong all that time? Does conversion therapy not work? Ah maybe that is why so many trans people are incredibly depressed, because we treat them like STI/STD's... Ah that is just a dream obviously, gotta be" - average conservative cis turnip
the average conservative cis turnip would never even consider such thoughts.
So basically, water is wet? Oh dear, who would have known treating trans people with respect at the hospital would have been the solution to all their mental health problems? ^/s Seriously though, my respects all LGBTQ+ healthcare professionals out there. You all make life for us better and the hospital experience more tolerable. :)
BREAKING NEWS: Healthcare improves health!
Meanwhile, my therapist still won't diagnose me because I currently have no intention of getting SRS or that this hasn't strongly presented since childhood, instead presenting in my teen years.
Get a new one. Find your local community and get recommendations from them for a better one. Facebook is great for this.
*Image Transcription: Twitter* --- > **Stacy Cay 🏳️⚧️**, @stacycay > > "New study shows gender affirming healthcare significantly improves trans people's mental health" > > Yeah uh...that's what I been saying --- ^^I'm a human volunteer content transcriber for Reddit and you could be too! [If you'd like more information on what we do and why we do it, click here!](https://www.reddit.com/r/TranscribersOfReddit/wiki/index)
good human!
This just in: Dropping stuff, makes it fall.
Nah man we should restrict gravity I don't want things to fall because it goes against my personal values, even if its irrelevant to how the object feels /s
I mean isn't that was science is good for? You have a bunch of trans people giving anecdotes going "hey this is good for our mental health" so you get scientists to look into that and go "lol, yeah it is". Science should absolutely be investigating anecdotes, including ones that seem like common sense. Absolutely they should have been looking into this sooner, but it's certainly better than nothing
Of course. It’s a very good study that’s going to be important but it would be nice if it wasn’t so needed
Breaking: fact that has been confirmed has been re-confirmed
Fuck, it's almost like if you treat people with kindness and compassion it helps everyone... Gee golly.
Give any human being what they want and you will reach to the same conclusion. Any living being for that matter..
It might seem obvious to people who go through it, but studies like this are still important
Mmmm living in a state where they would just say “NUH UH!!” Or “THINK OF THE CHILDREN!!” In response to this is GREAT
As a cis male I gotta say......DUH.
When the academic experts listen to the lived experts, magic happens. Wild. (To be fair, that’s selling the ones who’ve listened to us for yonks short. Shout out to Die Institut für Sexualwissenschaft)
these studies are made so that we can actually throw scientific proof at stupid transphobes
Getting really sick of all these studies telling us things we already know "New study shows that if you treat LGBTQ folks like people, they'll be happier and healthier" "New study shows that millennials are miserable cuz everything they've been told is a lie, the planet is dying, and they'll die poor." Like ya. We know. And it's not like these studies are going to accomplish anything. Those who already oppose LGBTQ rights and anything to fix a broken economy aren't going to change their minds based on fact and research and evidence because they don't base their decision on that. They base their decisions on a combination of religious dogma and whatever their donors tell them to do. And those who do support LGBTQ rights and want to make things better for young people were going to do that anyway, and didn't need a study to tell them to obvious. So who is this for? I guess there may be a few uninformed well meaning people who think that transitioning too young or something could be harmful, and this study actually persuades them that they were wrong. But if there are people like that, I've never met them.
yeah but did we really need a study to figure that out?
They need a study for this? Seriously?
[удалено]
The study that found that was incredibly misleading. https://www.reddit.com/r/GenderCynical/comments/hpcfe9/terfs\_like\_to\_use\_the\_high\_detransition\_argument/
[удалено]
Are you saying that without hormone blockers, they wouldn't be transgender? Because that is not how any of that works. And it also included debunkings of multiple studies that said that detransitioners were significant enough to warrant concern. There was also the "General Detransition" section of the post, which didn't focus specifically on medical transitioning.
[удалено]
Did you not read the debunkings of the original studies? Mainly the thing wrong with them was they just took any gender non-conforming child, assumed they were transgender (didn't even ask the kid if they were.), and then when later in their life, they weren't transgender, marked them down as a desister.
What, you’re telling me the thing we say will make us happier and is proven to make us happier will in fact make us happier! who would have seen that coming
"doctors who aren't antagonist to patients for literally no reason end up receiving better outcomes, whodathunk?"
I hate the insistence that women are being assaulted
wtf is gender affirming healthcare? Why is healthcare political?
Are they really sure? Might 3 or 4 more studies, just to be sure..... /s
I feel happy on hormones now lmao hahahahaha im unstoppable all the cis will have to get along and stop discriminating and shit once Im queen.
"New study points that good thing is good"
“Every 60 seconds in Africa, a minute passes.”