[ SECRET POST #6006 ]

[case]

⌈ Secret Post #6006 ⌋

Warning: Some secrets are NOT worksafe and may contain SPOILERS.


01.



__________________________________________________



02.



__________________________________________________



03.



__________________________________________________



04.



__________________________________________________



05.
[From]



__________________________________________________



06.
[Youtube channel "Hello Future Me"]



__________________________________________________



07.
[Monark]



__________________________________________________



08.



__________________________________________________


















09. [SPOILERS for Across the Spiderverse]




__________________________________________________



10. [WARNING for transphobia/standard JKR stuff]






















































Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 00 pages, 00 secrets from Secret Submission Post #858.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 0 - broken links ], [ 0 - not!secrets ], [ 0 - not!fandom ], [ 0 - too big ], [ 0 - repeat ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

Comments

[(Anonymous)]

Yeah, I'll second most of this.

Your last paragraph makes certain valid points, but I do personally think that the harm of making trans-identifying kids go through puberty before allowing them to transition is probably going to result in more harm overall than making puberty blockers available to them if desired. I'm not talking about being able to get them OTC, but I don't think most people are talking about that level of 100% unchecked availability, though.

I generally am of a mind that minors should not be legally permitted to make permanent, elective changes to their persons that will have tangible effects on them for the foreseeable future. With that said, how does that bare out when you have a suicidal fifteen-year-old and based on lengthy conversations with psych professionals, the brunt of their distress seems to be coming from their experience as a trans person who is unable to transition? How not-okay does a minor have to be before the risk that they will later come to regret a permanent choice is outweighed by the certainty of the distress they are experiencing?

[(Anonymous)]

I generally am of a mind that minors should not be legally permitted to make permanent, elective changes to their persons that will have tangible effects on them for the foreseeable future.

You want to be a professional ballerina, you HAVE to start young. Once your bones harden you won't really be able to develop the flexibility needed, especially in the hip joints. Guess when your bones start to harden? Puberty.... No permanent elective changes to their persons means no more professional ballerinas.

[(Anonymous)]

No more gymnasts either.

[(Anonymous)]

NAYRT but honestly I'd be okay with children not being the prime examples of athleticism in certain sports, especially when you look at the abuse and injuries in those fields.

If only the transphobes cared as much about permanent damage to high school football players as they do about what's in a child's pants.

[(Anonymous)]

DA

I'm not against trans people, but I wish we were having that conversation anyway. The physical damage to teenage boys participating in competitive football, and the social pressure to ignore the harm, all seems insane to me.

[(Anonymous)]

How do you the "transphobes" don't care about football players damage? You're making A LOT of assumptions here.

[(Anonymous)]

Because most of them are far right and the far right LOVES football for some reason.

[(Anonymous)]

Head injuries lead to impaired judgement, and people with impaired judgement tend to vote far right.

[(Anonymous)]

Honestly, I don't know what the answer is. I just think that there's a lot of conversations to be had about any permanent change but especially to minors.

[(Anonymous)]

The answer is actually easy. If we affirm their experiences, and let them be who they are, suicides DROP. By a LOT. No one performs gender affirming surgeries or sex hormone therapy on people under 18. At MOST you get puberty blockers, easy to reverse, easy to stop. That's the answer. LET THEM BE THEMSELVES.

The other option is to stand by and mentally harm kids so much they decide to kill themselves. I know which side I'm on.

[himejoshiheart]

+1

[(Anonymous)]

Yet y'all don't care when it's blocking precocious puberty in six-year-olds. You only have concerns once you see trans people.

[(Anonymous)]

Uh no, some of us do object to parents deciding when or if their kids will hit puberty, and putting them on serious drugs to arrest it. Some of us have been bringing up the fact that these drugs have serious, long term health drawbacks since the whole clusterfuck of "your mentally disabled or nonverbal autistic child will probably never be able to live independently, so it's better for everyone if they just never develop a sex drive or secondary sex characteristics. That could save them from the abysmal statistics of being molested by paid caretakers!" Which worked about as well as any feminist would expect "let's remove this girl's breast buds and interfere with her hormones" to, as a rape-prevention strategy.

But now those problems are compounded by girls who've suffered sexual abuse as children and think it will end if they don't grow curves. Which is deeply relatable, but doesn't exactly work: while they can stop identifying as girls, the worst people always have the least incentive to go along with it. And sexual abuse also happens to boys and trans men and trans women. And, as if that weren't enough, these drugs are very rough on human bodies. There is no simple "off" switch for libido, although (some) people have been wishing for such a thing for thousands of years.

[(Anonymous)]

No doctor worth their degree would ever give children drugs in these circumstances. Meaning that these abusive parents would DO THIS ANYWAY. They would have to go out of their way to find a doctor who would agree to do that. So sure, instead of enforcing already strict licensing and ethical rules for doctors, let's try to stop them by killing trans kids along the way, 'cause trans lives don't matter.

And also, stop conflating transmen with sexual abuse survivors. The idea that transmen are just abused and confused wittle girls who don't know what they're doing is deeply misogynist.

[(Anonymous)]

Nah. What's "deeply misogynist" is closing your ears to all the people who have expressly said that not wanting to be sexually abused was a major motivation for trying to not be read by other people as female. That there are trans men who have other motivations, sure. But the fact that this particular group makes your cause look bad, or you think it does, is not grounds for announcing that they don't exist or they don't matter.

As for "no doctor worth their degree" I want to agree with you, and on purely ethical grounds, I do. But if you dig into the history of puberty blockers, you will find that their use was, ah, "pioneered" shall we say, with the bodies of disabled people. Just like a lot of other experimental treatments. So casting it as a situation with rogue doctors who don't deserve their licenses is disingenuous.

I am not saying that making it harder for trans people to get puberty blockers is a reasonable course of action: I don't think it is. I am saying that what you are presenting as "uncontroversial" and "well accepted" use of puberty blockers on cis kids has been hotly contested and argued over. For reasons that rarely come up, but matter.

[(Anonymous)]

That there are trans men who have other motivations, sure.

You mean the MAJORITY of transmen?

But the fact that this particular group makes your cause look bad, or you think it does, is not grounds for announcing that they don't exist or they don't matter.

I didn't do that. YOU are the one doing that with transmen. Because some women have to find shelter in the concept of transmen to protect themselves because no one else will is not any kind of argument against gender affirming medical treatment. It's just an argument against misogynistic society and culture. They come from the same source. This is why it doesn't make my cause look bad. Women do what they have to to survive. The fact that the act of surviving comes with side effects is not a reason to take away the mode of survival. It's a reason to fix the CAUSE. Which is a culture that hates women AND transmen.


But if you dig into the history of puberty blockers, you will find that their use was, ah, "pioneered" shall we say, with the bodies of disabled people

If you dig into the medical history of ANYTHING you will find that it was "pioneered" on the bodies of people who couldn't say no. Modern gynecology was "pioneered" on enslaved black women with no anesthesia. This ain't special, my dude. MODERN doctors doing this are in fact rogue who don't deserve their license.

I am saying that what you are presenting as "uncontroversial" and "well accepted" use of puberty blockers on cis kids has been hotly contested and argued over.

Except not? At least not in the medical community, which has used puberty blockers on cis kids since the 1980s. They are well documented, well studied, and very safe when used under supervision. I don't think uneducated people not accepting them makes them controversial. I don't take advice on medicine from plumbers. I don't take plumbing advice from accountants.

[(Anonymous)]

Gender care in the US is doing an inadequate job telling the difference between kids who will be glad they transitioned and kids who were trying to escape something that drugs and surgeries will not help them escape. The fact that the right tries to exploit this doesn't make it any less of a problem.

By the way, I think it either says something about how ingrained your gender stereotypes are that you think I'm male, or you're working curiously hard to try to find out whether I am by throwing gendered descriptors at me and seeing if I react.

Modern doctors doing what doctors never stopped doing "don't deserve their license." Okay. But these are the same people that ought to be trusted when they assert that puberty blockers are great.