This new term, "non-consensual puberty" is so befuddling. What does that even mean? And what kind of world do you have to live in for that to make any sense?
That's just the first step on the slippery slope that we're already approaching the bottom of. The way things are going the Canadian state will probably soon criminalize non-consensual breathing.
Every week, it seems, in my extended social circle of friends' children and relatives I learn of yet another young woman going trans. I learned of two just last week. I just throw up my hands and exclaim, "Well, of course! How can they resist this juggernaut?"
Thank you for reporting from inside the belly of the beast.
They advocate huge, life and organ-altering surgeries for an ideation. They will not discuss those who grew out of this ideation, or the adult detransitioners who name childhood trauma, complex PTSD, autism or OCD as the real culprit. They make excuses when they follow up and find out the patient no longer identifies as their opposite sex "identity." I have to say it does remind me of the sworn affidavit submitted in my custody case, in which my husband's "sexologist" claimed she made his diagnosis in the first appointment, that I, his ex-wife "forced" him to "decide to life full time as female" because I ended the marriage when business trips were revealed to be cross-dressing and sex-capades, and that our children, whom she'd never met, would be fine, their father's refusal to answer to "Daddy" was assuredly not the problem. 2 years later, our older son threatened to end his life 3 different ways, at the age of 9. But, no data taken on that, "see no evil" wins again!
How was the atmosphere with your fellow attendees? You had said in advance that you were going, and more people know what you look like than did at WPATH last year. Did you get any sense that your cover was blown, or that you were an outsider taking notes in a furtive manner?
I don't think I was recognized and I think it was very unlikely that I would be in any case. Fewer pure activists at EPATH, which made the atmosphere less Stasi-like than WPATH.
These people are nuts. It's like watching the movie "Conspiracy" depicting the Wannsee conference. Those men sat around and calmly discussed setting up extermination camps, as if they were discussing the grocery list for the week. When I was 12/13-yrs-old (1973/74), I spent a year in Holland, just 28 years after the end of WWII. The Dutch kept much of the 3rd Reich symbols on buildings so visitors would have to come face-to-face with reality. I had the misfortune of visiting somewhere and pictures from the Mengele archives were on display. I remember one picture where Mengele was standing over one of his experiments (a live human) strapped to a surgical table, with a completely calm expression on his sociopathic face. I've listened to some of the creatures in this industry that destroys children. I would arm myself if they came around.
I found Megan McArdle’s formulation of the Oedipus Trap to be helpful for understanding why people double down. She researched the doctor who performed thousands of lobotomies and who insisted until the end of his life that he improved people’s lives. To confront the reality of having caused harm is just too unbearable for most of us. https://open.spotify.com/episode/4k2nzooJVkSer0sbNqtir6
Their refusal to listen or discuss seems like a tacit admission they don't have the evidence they need to support their beliefs: or why wouldn't they want to share it? And their refusal to collect the evidence needed by longterm followups, is the best way to avoid dealing with detransitioners. This pattern of avoidance can only have two explanations: either overweening confidence, or real fear of confirming unadmitted doubts, that they might be or ARE doing harm. So "just keep on believin'" is the only option left to them. And yes -- trying to remake the world in the image of gender ID sounds like a desperate attempt to make sense of it all.
They seem to be exhibiting cognitive dissonance, in the original sense of the term. When confronted with information that contradicts their beliefs, they double down.
I also get the sense that they are themselves psychologically fragile. I wonder if that was what you felt.
I also wonder if this cult will at some point produce an apostate, and what kind of crisis that might create. The underlying dynamic does not seems stable. I can’t say that I predict that the social fabric of the group will rupture, but it seems likely to grow even crazier.
They sound like a bunch of well-meaning people with some serious cognitive dissonance.
I think I've had an epiphany this week about why so many seemingly, good, intelligent people have fallen for this. It came from reading two articles. One by Kathleen Stock in Unherd: https://unherd.com/2023/05/why-should-lesbians-sleep-with-men/, where she makes the point that sexuality is something that can't be faked or forced - the sex you are attracted to is part of your hard-wiring, and trying force desire for political/moral reasons doesn't work. The second article was on the Genspect website: https://genspect.org/no-trans-is-not-the-new-gay/ (a year old - not quite sure how I came to reading it this week). It makes a good argument that while homosexuality is innate, being trans only makes sense in a social context, and people (themselves and others) can be fooled.
And then it occurred to me: the people at the conference, and many others (good people), have a sincere belief that "transness" is an innate, immutable aspect of the self, in the same way sexuality is, and can't be faked. It's not guided by misogyny, but comes from a place of (naive) respect.
So this is the main reason so many left and centre-left political parties, corporations, human rights organisations, celebrities, young people and many women have latched on to it. Explains the shocked gasps if anyone questions it, because that's like homophobia, and beyond the pale. Anyone who doubts must be closed-minded and mean.
As soon as you start to doubt this innateness, the whole thing falls apart - and that must be terrifying for the conference delegates.
But even if they cling to their beliefs, it still doesn't quite make sense - if "trans" is a natural state, and sex isn't important, why medicalise it?
You say there were just thirty people eligible for the 17-year followup of the original Dutch study.
I see from the original paper that they treated 54 patients with blockers, so was this just the first 30 of the study? Did they say how many of each sex?
I talked to some regular attendees. When you express concerns *and* they think you're one of them, they express concerns, too. But if I was like "So I think transitioning kids is bad and isn't this part also bad," they would shut down.
This new term, "non-consensual puberty" is so befuddling. What does that even mean? And what kind of world do you have to live in for that to make any sense?
As someone who went through non-consensual birth I am still mad at my parents 50 years later. They should have asked me.
That's just the first step on the slippery slope that we're already approaching the bottom of. The way things are going the Canadian state will probably soon criminalize non-consensual breathing.
When medical malpractice offers an anti-developmental choice that didn't previously exist, the possibility of consent to it arises.
"Don't Stop Believing'" could be the title of your book! I promise I will read the whole thing!
I know you will! You're kind of the definition of always does her homework!
Every week, it seems, in my extended social circle of friends' children and relatives I learn of yet another young woman going trans. I learned of two just last week. I just throw up my hands and exclaim, "Well, of course! How can they resist this juggernaut?"
Thank you for reporting from inside the belly of the beast.
Any discussion of the effective bans on transitioning minors in the UK, Sweden, etc?
Yes but as uninformed attacks, not reckoned with.
*we've yet to see how effective they are.
They advocate huge, life and organ-altering surgeries for an ideation. They will not discuss those who grew out of this ideation, or the adult detransitioners who name childhood trauma, complex PTSD, autism or OCD as the real culprit. They make excuses when they follow up and find out the patient no longer identifies as their opposite sex "identity." I have to say it does remind me of the sworn affidavit submitted in my custody case, in which my husband's "sexologist" claimed she made his diagnosis in the first appointment, that I, his ex-wife "forced" him to "decide to life full time as female" because I ended the marriage when business trips were revealed to be cross-dressing and sex-capades, and that our children, whom she'd never met, would be fine, their father's refusal to answer to "Daddy" was assuredly not the problem. 2 years later, our older son threatened to end his life 3 different ways, at the age of 9. But, no data taken on that, "see no evil" wins again!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qVKnVw66i2E
How was the atmosphere with your fellow attendees? You had said in advance that you were going, and more people know what you look like than did at WPATH last year. Did you get any sense that your cover was blown, or that you were an outsider taking notes in a furtive manner?
I don't think I was recognized and I think it was very unlikely that I would be in any case. Fewer pure activists at EPATH, which made the atmosphere less Stasi-like than WPATH.
These people are nuts. It's like watching the movie "Conspiracy" depicting the Wannsee conference. Those men sat around and calmly discussed setting up extermination camps, as if they were discussing the grocery list for the week. When I was 12/13-yrs-old (1973/74), I spent a year in Holland, just 28 years after the end of WWII. The Dutch kept much of the 3rd Reich symbols on buildings so visitors would have to come face-to-face with reality. I had the misfortune of visiting somewhere and pictures from the Mengele archives were on display. I remember one picture where Mengele was standing over one of his experiments (a live human) strapped to a surgical table, with a completely calm expression on his sociopathic face. I've listened to some of the creatures in this industry that destroys children. I would arm myself if they came around.
Excellent article, Eliza. In-depth and chilling. Thank you for it.
Sounds like they can't afford to stop believin'. Questioning what they are doing is too terrifying to be thinkable.
I found Megan McArdle’s formulation of the Oedipus Trap to be helpful for understanding why people double down. She researched the doctor who performed thousands of lobotomies and who insisted until the end of his life that he improved people’s lives. To confront the reality of having caused harm is just too unbearable for most of us. https://open.spotify.com/episode/4k2nzooJVkSer0sbNqtir6
Their refusal to listen or discuss seems like a tacit admission they don't have the evidence they need to support their beliefs: or why wouldn't they want to share it? And their refusal to collect the evidence needed by longterm followups, is the best way to avoid dealing with detransitioners. This pattern of avoidance can only have two explanations: either overweening confidence, or real fear of confirming unadmitted doubts, that they might be or ARE doing harm. So "just keep on believin'" is the only option left to them. And yes -- trying to remake the world in the image of gender ID sounds like a desperate attempt to make sense of it all.
They seem to be exhibiting cognitive dissonance, in the original sense of the term. When confronted with information that contradicts their beliefs, they double down.
I also get the sense that they are themselves psychologically fragile. I wonder if that was what you felt.
I also wonder if this cult will at some point produce an apostate, and what kind of crisis that might create. The underlying dynamic does not seems stable. I can’t say that I predict that the social fabric of the group will rupture, but it seems likely to grow even crazier.
What’s your sense?
They sound like a bunch of well-meaning people with some serious cognitive dissonance.
I think I've had an epiphany this week about why so many seemingly, good, intelligent people have fallen for this. It came from reading two articles. One by Kathleen Stock in Unherd: https://unherd.com/2023/05/why-should-lesbians-sleep-with-men/, where she makes the point that sexuality is something that can't be faked or forced - the sex you are attracted to is part of your hard-wiring, and trying force desire for political/moral reasons doesn't work. The second article was on the Genspect website: https://genspect.org/no-trans-is-not-the-new-gay/ (a year old - not quite sure how I came to reading it this week). It makes a good argument that while homosexuality is innate, being trans only makes sense in a social context, and people (themselves and others) can be fooled.
And then it occurred to me: the people at the conference, and many others (good people), have a sincere belief that "transness" is an innate, immutable aspect of the self, in the same way sexuality is, and can't be faked. It's not guided by misogyny, but comes from a place of (naive) respect.
So this is the main reason so many left and centre-left political parties, corporations, human rights organisations, celebrities, young people and many women have latched on to it. Explains the shocked gasps if anyone questions it, because that's like homophobia, and beyond the pale. Anyone who doubts must be closed-minded and mean.
As soon as you start to doubt this innateness, the whole thing falls apart - and that must be terrifying for the conference delegates.
But even if they cling to their beliefs, it still doesn't quite make sense - if "trans" is a natural state, and sex isn't important, why medicalise it?
You say there were just thirty people eligible for the 17-year followup of the original Dutch study.
I see from the original paper that they treated 54 patients with blockers, so was this just the first 30 of the study? Did they say how many of each sex?
This is a different patient group and was not clear whether a subset of original cohort. This was 30 "trans-autistic" patients
Wow. They’re up to 17-year follow-ups for ‘trans-autistic’ patients already!
Do you happen to know if there’s any already-published research on this group?
On this subgroup, I don't know. The 17-year follow-up does not seem to have been published yet, only presented. Van der Miesen would be lead author.
I talked to some regular attendees. When you express concerns *and* they think you're one of them, they express concerns, too. But if I was like "So I think transitioning kids is bad and isn't this part also bad," they would shut down.