The Canada Research Chair on Transgender Children and their Families just released a new factsheet on “Talking to youth who discontinue their transition.” Unsurprisingly, the researchers dutifully recycle all the talking points that gender-affirming clinicians fall back on when transition fails:
Rather depressing the extent to which so many governmental organizations in Canada – and elsewhere – have been "ideologically captured" by the "Transish Inquisition".
Case in point, and something likely to be right up your alley, is Manitoba's own Teen Talk which blathers on at some length about "gender identity":
"Gender identity is how a person feels and who they know them self to be when it comes to their gender. .... However, gender isn’t about someone’s anatomy, it is about who they know them self to be. There are many different gender identities, including male, female, transgender, gender neutral, non-binary, agender, pangender, genderqueer, two-spirit, third gender, and all, none or a combination of these. ...."
Don't see that there's anything intrinsically wrong with the concept of "gender identity" – at least to the extent that that shopping list of genders is just some names for different personality types.
But one of the bigger problems is that there's very little if any scientific basis for that categorization scheme, is that there is virtually nothing in the way of objective correlates that uniquely differentiates any "gender" from any other one. Little better than pseudoscience and "Chinese fortune cookies", as has been said about the Myers-Briggs type system:
And Canada's own statistics department – rather like far too many others – is likewise guilty on that score. For instance, see their call for "consultation on gender and sexual diversity statistical metadata standards":
Nice that they clearly differentiate between sex and gender: "Sex and gender refer to two different concepts, but are interrelated."
However, their "classifications for gender" are so incoherent and so unscientific, if not actually anti-scientific, as to be beyond belief; whoever was responsible for that schlock should be fired:
"Male gender: This category includes persons whose current gender was reported as male."
Circular Definitions R Us.
But that highlights what is so fraudulent – intentionally or not – about so much of "gender ideology": the rather desperate attempt to muddy the difference between sex and gender – a difference they apparently accept – by using the same terms – "male" and "female" – to describe subcategories of the primary categories of sex and gender. To just call that "bait-and-switch" is probably being charitable to a fault.
What's weird is WPATH 7 standards of care actually advises clinicians to review possible consequences of medical transition with clients and makes clear that some will not want to medically transition after they learn more and that this is an entirely acceptable outcome. This, plus other things documented in the DSM, tells me that clinicians who push transition don't read and don't ask enough questions.
Diagnostic manuals and standards of care are often hotly debated by professionals but with everything trans, we're made to feel as though everything's cut and dry and there's only one avenue for treatment which is NEVER TRUE in the world of psychology.
That's why I think this "no debate" attitude that pervades this entire issue should IMMEDIATELY raise red flags for EVERYONE.
No doctors here either looking at the well publicised side effects of the two hormone suppressing drugs I have been prescribed for prostate cancer?
The same stuff, Degarelix and Decapeptyl, is used in the gender conversion therapies available to disaffected youth who have been led to believe they are living in the wrong body.
Funny how in one context these drugs have seriously debilitating long term effects, and in another they are magic sweeties that can change you into who you really are without even having to read Nietzsche :-)
Very valuable work you’re doing. You show that how a topic is represented depends upon the framework from which it is put forward.
The trans movement carefully and skilfully steer people’s thoughts towards trans-positive and away from anything that detracts from that agenda.
Thanks again
Jude
Sounds like an exposed cult desperately defending dodgy practices.
In other words, “please don’t sue us”.
Rather depressing the extent to which so many governmental organizations in Canada – and elsewhere – have been "ideologically captured" by the "Transish Inquisition".
Case in point, and something likely to be right up your alley, is Manitoba's own Teen Talk which blathers on at some length about "gender identity":
"Gender identity is how a person feels and who they know them self to be when it comes to their gender. .... However, gender isn’t about someone’s anatomy, it is about who they know them self to be. There are many different gender identities, including male, female, transgender, gender neutral, non-binary, agender, pangender, genderqueer, two-spirit, third gender, and all, none or a combination of these. ...."
https://teentalk.ca/learn-about/gender-identity/
Don't see that there's anything intrinsically wrong with the concept of "gender identity" – at least to the extent that that shopping list of genders is just some names for different personality types.
But one of the bigger problems is that there's very little if any scientific basis for that categorization scheme, is that there is virtually nothing in the way of objective correlates that uniquely differentiates any "gender" from any other one. Little better than pseudoscience and "Chinese fortune cookies", as has been said about the Myers-Briggs type system:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Myers%E2%80%93Briggs_Type_Indicator
And Canada's own statistics department – rather like far too many others – is likewise guilty on that score. For instance, see their call for "consultation on gender and sexual diversity statistical metadata standards":
https://www.statcan.gc.ca/en/concepts/consult-variables/gender#a4
Nice that they clearly differentiate between sex and gender: "Sex and gender refer to two different concepts, but are interrelated."
However, their "classifications for gender" are so incoherent and so unscientific, if not actually anti-scientific, as to be beyond belief; whoever was responsible for that schlock should be fired:
"Male gender: This category includes persons whose current gender was reported as male."
Circular Definitions R Us.
But that highlights what is so fraudulent – intentionally or not – about so much of "gender ideology": the rather desperate attempt to muddy the difference between sex and gender – a difference they apparently accept – by using the same terms – "male" and "female" – to describe subcategories of the primary categories of sex and gender. To just call that "bait-and-switch" is probably being charitable to a fault.
What's weird is WPATH 7 standards of care actually advises clinicians to review possible consequences of medical transition with clients and makes clear that some will not want to medically transition after they learn more and that this is an entirely acceptable outcome. This, plus other things documented in the DSM, tells me that clinicians who push transition don't read and don't ask enough questions.
Diagnostic manuals and standards of care are often hotly debated by professionals but with everything trans, we're made to feel as though everything's cut and dry and there's only one avenue for treatment which is NEVER TRUE in the world of psychology.
That's why I think this "no debate" attitude that pervades this entire issue should IMMEDIATELY raise red flags for EVERYONE.
No doctors here either looking at the well publicised side effects of the two hormone suppressing drugs I have been prescribed for prostate cancer?
The same stuff, Degarelix and Decapeptyl, is used in the gender conversion therapies available to disaffected youth who have been led to believe they are living in the wrong body.
Funny how in one context these drugs have seriously debilitating long term effects, and in another they are magic sweeties that can change you into who you really are without even having to read Nietzsche :-)
I can't get over that quote! That was the best they got?
I can't either. It's so muddled!
When did the phrase 'assigned gender/sex at birth' become a thing? It is a nonsensical phrase