Australian T.V. Documentary On De-Transition Stirs Heated Debate

[Carolyn Marie]

https://www.news.com.au/entertainment/tv/spotlight-documentary-on-trans-regret-stirs-heated-debate/news-story/e0d78c822273b28acc80ceaefa9020db

 

 

More pot stirring from "documentarians" on the right. No comment from me on the contents of the doc, as I haven't seen it and won't watch it.

 

Carolyn Marie

[AllieJ]

I watched it and made notes. Channel 7 is struggling to build ratings for it's new program, so they stooped to trying to grab some controversy by running this transphobic rubbish.

 

The promotion was that kids were being told to transition, but as the individual subjects revealed their stories, they all admitted they had been influenced by social media primarily. Interestingly, all the interviewed 'trans' subjects were AFAB. The 'experts' presented were all known trans activists except for Prof. Ian Hinkley, who prevented some real facts and balance, but was constantly talked over by the so called journalist, Liam Bartlett. He was pushing the notion that children presenting for gender support we being placed on a one way train to medical transition, which is the exact opposite to the real case (legally, both parents must sign a consent to any treatment to a minor). 

 

They interviewed parents who lamented that they were unaware of their kids exposure to online influencers, and also that their children had changed their preferred name and pronouns at school. If these 'parents' did some parenting, they would know their children, and what they were up to. To illustrate under age surgeries in Australia, they interviewed Chloe from Los Angeles. The Aussie subjects who had surgeries were all legally adults at the time. Bartlett spewed out a number of incorrect, but common claims from transphobes, so it was obvious where their research was from. The doctors and recognised health professionals refused to participate in this farce, knowing the bias this show would present. 

 

My take aways were that parents need to educate their children not to be influenced by influencers, that I am even more convinced we need a solid diagnosis for transgender to discredit the flow of challenges, and that 7's spotlight needs a lunchtime  time slot similar to re runs of Jerry Springer! I really feel for those subjects who presented their distress, but they were all in that position for reasons other than being trans, and this show preyed on their vulnerabilities. 

 

Hugs,

 

Allie

[Ivy]

5 hours ago, AllieJ said:

I watched it and made notes. Channel 7 is struggling to build ratings for it's new program, so they stooped to trying to grab some controversy by running this transphobic rubbish.

No surprise here.

It's a pity that "researchers" are willing to lie, and misrepresent "facts" to "prove" their previously arrived at conclusions.

More of a mockumentary than documentary.  But yeah, it's all about ratings, just like Fox "News."

[Betty K]

15 hours ago, AllieJ said:

My take aways were that parents need to educate their children not to be influenced by influencers, that I am even more convinced we need a solid diagnosis for transgender to discredit the flow of challenges

Greetings from Brisbane AllieJ. I didn’t watch the piece and may not do so, since I’m pretty sure I know what to expect. I’m curious about these two comments though? I hope you’re not suggesting a return to a heightened level of gatekeeping or that the “social contagion” theory has any validity to it. 
 

Here’s Erin Reed’s take on it. Since according to Reed and other reputable sources there is no “detransition wave”, heightened gatekeeping seems ill-advised. After all, there were always be a small number of people who regret any medical process. in the case of trans people, the numbers appear to be very small.

 

https://www.erininthemorning.com/p/detransitioner-wave-fails-to-materialize

[AllieJ]

25 minutes ago, Betty K said:

Greetings from Brisbane AllieJ. I didn’t watch the piece and may not do so, since I’m pretty sure I know what to expect. I’m curious about these two comments though? I hope you’re not suggesting a return to a heightened level of gatekeeping or that the “social contagion” theory has any validity to it. 
 

Here’s Erin Reed’s take on it. Since according to Reed and other reputable sources there is no “detransition wave”, heightened gatekeeping seems ill-advised. After all, there were always be a small number of people who regret any medical process. in the case of trans people, the numbers appear to be very small.

 

https://www.erininthemorning.com/p/detransitioner-wave-fails-to-materialize

Betty, the people highlighted on the show admitted that they were all influenced by social media influencers making out that transition was a path to social acceptance. The parents of these young people indicated they had no idea what their kids were seeing, and I know that is common for underage kids. Good parenting these days is knowing what your under age kids are viewing so you can at least counsel them on it. 

 

The current diagnosis criteria is to establish a persistent feeling of gender confusion, and this leaves a lot of grey area. There are other conditions which can exhibit similar feelings, and psychologists role is to eliminate those, leaving trans as the only possibility. Unfortunately, I have spoken to psychologists who believe they can diagnose transgender. I was diagnosed and referred for HRT after 40 minutes! The condition of Gender Incongruence is basically established by asking a patient to self describe. This is why there is a lack of confidence in diagnosis within both the medical community and broader society, and this forms the basis of the persecution of our community. I am convinced that a more black and white diagnosis would improve societies acceptance of our condition. The basis of the 7 show was that the subjects had been misdiagnosed, and currently there is not a criteria which would make this clear, so this sort of accusation will continue. 

 

Gatekeeping and an accurate diagnosis are different things. Gatekeepers intend on delaying someone until they give up their request for assistance, whereas a more accurate diagnosis is furthering the patient towards appropriate treatment. I speak to lots of trans people, and to parents of young trans people, and see their distress at having treatment delayed because they are not sure enough to proceed. There needs to be a clinical pathway which provides more certainty, even if it takes a little longer initially. This would also eliminate claims of 'social contagion'.

 

Hugs,

 

Allie 

[Betty K]

1 hour ago, AllieJ said:

I speak to lots of trans people, and to parents of young trans people,

Oh, now that is interesting. Do you work with trans people and their parents? I work as a disability support worker for trans youth, but most of my clients are over 18. I have met a few high-school age trans people and/or their parents but would love to meet more. I have also read a bit on the subject (ie, books by scholars and health-care professionals) but again I’m by no means an expert.

 

As to the rest, thank you for further explaining your view, and I’m glad you’re not advocating for gatekeeping per se. Any initiative to encourage health-care professionals to spend more time with gender-diverse youth is something I would fully support, but I am wary that it be the right kind of heath care. My first experience attempting to access hormones was the opposite of yours: within 40 minutes (or actually more like 20!), following a string of invasive, pat and antiquated questions, the so-called specialist told me I was not trans enough. I’m not surprised that your experience was the opposite and tbh I think that is a far more suitable approach in the case of an adult who, I presume, gave every appearance of having reflected deeply on the topic. Granted the situation is slightly different in the case of young people, but I have very little faith in cis doctors to know what constitutes being trans or not. The history of gender-affirming care certainly gives me no reason to think otherwise. 

 

2 hours ago, AllieJ said:

Betty, the people highlighted on the show admitted that they were all influenced by social media influencers making out that transition was a path to social acceptance.

 

I guess I will have to watch the show after all, because that all sounds suspicious to me. Are you certain these kids hadn’t re-thought their positions after confrontations with unsupportive parents, or a spell of unofficial conversion therapy perhaps? Also I’m curious: since apparently there was only one (American) detransitioner featured, how far along were these kids in their journeys? Was there any damage done?

 

2 hours ago, AllieJ said:

this forms the basis of the persecution of our community. I am convinced that a more black and white diagnosis would improve societies acceptance of our condition.

I don’t think this forms “the” basis of our persecution, far from it. It may form *a* basis, but the persecution is coming from many angles at once. To me it seems clear that some parents simply fear the idea of having trans kids; some may even find it abhorrent. It makes little difference to them whether those kids are “really” trans or not. The rest is mostly the media and opportunistic politicians trying to sow division with controversy. As to whether a more black and white diagnosis would help, maybe. But who will create that diagnosis and how on earth will it operate? (And will it make mistakes and exclude people? That seems certain.) 

 

2 hours ago, AllieJ said:

This would also eliminate claims of 'social contagion'.

This seems unlikely to me. Those claims will exist wherever there are trans kids and bigots, whether doctors say those trans kids are legitimate or not. The social contagion theory stems from the disbelief of a bunch of transphobic parents on a site called 4thWaveNow. Whether their children were “really” trans or not, who knows, but the parents were determined not to believe it. No diagnosis could be so airtight as to persuade those people.

 

But you know what, it suddenly strikes me that maybe we’re having the wrong discussion here. The question is not whether these kids are trans or not. Trans is a broad and inclusive term; basically anyone who is questioning their gender can legitimately claim to be trans. The question is which kids will benefit from medicalisation and which kids won’t. I can believe that more rigorous screening might help in that respect. But if any cis doctor ever claims to know better than a trans person what being trans constitutes, I call BS.

 

You said that gatekeeping entails making patients wait, and I’m glad that you recognise the potential harm in that. The main problem as I see it is that some of these kids see themselves in a race against time. If parents are unsupportive, or if the child fears they might be, then the child may delay discussing their dysphoria for years and only do so as the deadline of puberty is looming or already underway. Did you see the recent Four Corners special “Blocked”? It was flawed, and gave too much airtime to transphobes and conspiracy theories, but it did illustrate profoundly the dangers of delaying kids indefinitely. It was heartbreaking. So much of the fear around gender-affirming care for kids seems to hinge on the general public’s horror when faced with a few detransitioners. Where is the horror at the far greater number of trans suicides? A recent study found that Australian trans teenagers are 20 times(!!!) more likely to attempt suicide than their cis peers. That is where the media’s focus should be.

 

It’s nice talking to you AllieJ, and I hope I haven’t expressed myself too forcefully. I know we both mean well and are batting for the same side.
 

X Bette

[AllieJ]

Bette, I have been very active with the trans communities worldwide, on the management committees  of a few groups, run 100's of zoom sessions for trans people from Australia eastwards to Iraq, and face to face with parents of trans kids, including my brother who has a 14 year old trans child. I have been very disappointed with the lack of knowledge in our medical community, and the confidence some psychs have in the mistaken belief that trans is a mental disorder. 

 

I believe that the general population has doubts that Trans is valid, and the majority believe it is a lifestyle choice, and this underpins the anti trans activists. It also is what breaks up couples, families and communities. If a solid diagnosis was adopted universally, it would remove much of the arguments of the conservatives, though there will always be radicals, it is the acceptance of the majority voters which count.

 

'Social contagion' is based on the premise that trans is not valid, and is merely a lifestyle which has become popular. Again, there will always be 'flat earthers', but it's the majority belief which changes policy and laws. Trans is not the only medical condition which has struggled with lack of solid diagnosis, and I have friends who have endometriosis who struggled being taken seriously. Improvement in diagnosis have improved this in recent years. 

 

You are right in that the term Trans is so broad it doesn't properly serve those who need treatments, but as we learn more about Dysphoria, I believe this will be refined. But 'persistent discomfort with gender' is all we have, and simply not good enough.

 

Watch the show, and you will see that the subjects still don't know if they are trans needing treatment, and we should be able to ascertain this with some certainty. Enjoy BrisVegas, it's freezing here!

 

Hugs,

 

Allie

[Betty K]

Yes I guess I will have to watch the show (sigh).

 

A small point, but I believe an important one. I don't want to see the term transgender refined; I like that it is inclusive. As I said, I think the issue is simply who will benefit from what treatment, not whether they qualify as trans or not. Telling anyone that they do not meet some medical requirement for being trans is simply not the solution here, in my view.

 

Nor do I believe that being transgender is a medical condition. The relevant medical condition, currently, is gender dysphoria, isn't it? But I agree that gender dysphoria is a very vague term. As to whether the medical profession is realistically in any position to refine that term, time will tell.

 

I agree that it is disgusting the number of medical professionals who think being trans is a mental disorder. That so-called specialist I spoke of still used the term "gender identity disorder" when pronouncing her judgement on me. It appears I was not disordered enough to qualify for her help.

 

BrisVegas is certainly beautiful at the moment.

 

 

[Betty K]

Ugh, I just Googled it and that horrible Jillian Spencer came up again!

 

But can you tell me how I actually watch it? I haven't watched anything on Channel 7 in years.

[AllieJ]

6 minutes ago, Betty K said:

Ugh, I just Googled it and that horrible Jillian Spencer came up again!

 

But can you tell me how I actually watch it? I haven't watched anything on Channel 7 in years.

Betty, You have to join 7 Plus to stream the episode. Yes, all the 'experts' in it are known transphobes except Prof. Hickey, who Bartlett talked over.

 

In 2018, the WHO reclassified Trans as Gender Incongruence from a mental disorder to a medical condition. It took another 4 years for the American Psychiatric Association to also admit it was not a mental disorder. There has been an increasing body of evidence that trans people have a foetal developmental variation in parts of their brains, and the results over many studies have been the same and with very high rates of accuracy. Currently, the APA maintains that Gender Dysphoria is a psychological condition (as diagnosed by persistent discomfort), but it is likely that soon it will shown as a function of part of the brain known as Bed Nucleus. This would provide the definitive diagnosis I believe we need, but I also know many in the trans community fear it. Until then, we will continue to have our validity challenged and these sorts of programs will continue.

 

Hugs,

 

Allie

[Betty K]

Allie, if you have the links to those studies at hand can you send them to me? So far I had thought the evidence was pretty slim for that theory, but it seems I have missed some information?

 

I can understand why many in the trans community would fear such a thing, since it could be used to exclude people from accessing treatment and resources. But I have to say, if it did exclude some of us then that would seem to suggest the science behind it was not very accurate. (ie, maybe a foetal developmental variation is one cause of gender variance but not the only one?)
 

Is there any other reason trans people have to fear it?

 

 

[AllieJ]

Betty, there are a lot of papers and articles on this, and below are references to some which focus on the exhibited differences in the Bed Nucleus as this appears to be the strongest indicator, though there are other parts of the brain which exhibited differences, there may be other reasons for them. There was a great paper by Harvard University, but it was removed from online as anti trans groups published sections out of context to push their case. The Oxford University paper below (academic.oup)is decades old and was done via dissections, but it's findings provided the impetus for many other studies. The scientific papers are hard for lay people to read, so I put links to summaries.

https://academic.oup.com/jcem/article/85/5/2034/2660626

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/18980961/

https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2018/05/180524112351.htm

https://www.identiversity.org/topics/transgender-people/neuroscience-transgender-research

https://www.nature.com/articles/378068a0

 

If, and I believe when, these studies gain acceptance, it will strengthen the diagnosis of trans people as having a medical condition, but many trans people fear tests which might indicate they are not trans, or would be required for funding from insurance companies. Just remember, although there is a great body of results, they have yet to be accepted by academia, and more study will be required.

 

Hugs,

 

Allie

[Betty K]

2 hours ago, AllieJ said:

but many trans people fear tests which might indicate they are not trans

In my mind that would be a very unhappy outcome. A ridiculous outcome. I could never support the use of such tests for the purpose of excluding some trans people from treatment.

 

Thank you for the links.

[Sascha]

Hi, 

 

While I think these studies will help strengthen the diagnosis for trans people and improve societal acceptance, I hope these test don't become and obstacle for people which for whatever reason get negative results. I think it is the case for all of us, that something in our brains is telling us that our bodies don't quite align with who we are, and I am not sure if these brain tests are always going to be able to show that. 

[Betty K]

14 minutes ago, Sascha said:

I am not sure if these brain tests are always going to be able to show that. 

Agreed. I find that very hard to believe. I think there are many different ways of being transgender.

[Ivy]

Interesting discussion.

[Betty K]

On 9/5/2023 at 11:58 AM, AllieJ said:

Betty, the people highlighted on the show admitted that they were all influenced by social media influencers making out that transition was a path to social acceptance.

 

Allie, I feel as if I watched a different show from you! I took notes too:

 

- Courtney, the woman from Perth, said, "I think social media is the ideal modern day psy-ops platform more than anything. I mean, if you want to push any agenda that's the way to do it." (A vague statement in response to a general question about the internet's influence on kids, not a comment on her personal experience.)

 

- Chloe Cole said, "It wasn't until I was introduced to the transgender community online that I actually started to think of myself as a boy."

 

- Mel, the woman from Melbourne, said, "I spoke to a trans activist who was like, 'I felt the exact way you felt,' and it kind of like really solidified that maybe transitioning could be the solution." When asked, "Were you finding those answers online?" she says yes, that's how she met the activist, and that it "planted the seed that there are people like this that exist".

 

And that is all any of them said on the topic of online influence: that they interacted with trans people online and that changed the way they thought about themselves. In other words, they could have come to this very site! If kids questioning their gender can't come to a site like TransPulse, then where will they be? (And that includes trans groups on Reddit, Facebook, and other sites I don't know, I'm sure.)

 

On 9/5/2023 at 11:58 AM, AllieJ said:

The parents of these young people indicated they had no idea what their kids were seeing, and I know that is common for underage kids.

 

Which kids are you talking about? There are only two parents interviewed and they are speaking about a fourth trans person who is not featured in the show. Granted, the mother describes watching videos of trans influencers, but none of the other people interviewed mention them at all.

 

On 9/4/2023 at 7:29 PM, AllieJ said:

but they were all in that position for reasons other than being trans

 

That is a presumption. In the case of Chloe and Mel it is probably accurate. In the case of Courtney, when asked why she detransitioned she says she realised "I live in the real world and I can't be the man I want to be". That strongly suggests a trans identity.

 

So much for the show, but it did get me thinking. As I said above, and as Chloe Cole reiterates, kids feel pressured to rush into medical transition because they don't want to develop secondary sex characteristics. So I suggest the best solution to this would be to change society's stigma around "mismatching" secondary sex characteristics. How can this happen? By normalising trans identity. The more openly trans, non-passing role models kids have, the less they will feel hurried to conform to society's notions of binary gender.

 

The other route, the route you suggest, is a way of appeasing society. This is a way of changing society. And it's so simple: trans pride.

 

[AllieJ]

11 hours ago, Betty K said:

 

Allie, I feel as if I watched a different show from you! I took notes too:

 

- Courtney, the woman from Perth, said, "I think social media is the ideal modern day psy-ops platform more than anything. I mean, if you want to push any agenda that's the way to do it." (A vague statement in response to a general question about the internet's influence on kids, not a comment on her personal experience.)

 

- Chloe Cole said, "It wasn't until I was introduced to the transgender community online that I actually started to think of myself as a boy."

 

- Mel, the woman from Melbourne, said, "I spoke to a trans activist who was like, 'I felt the exact way you felt,' and it kind of like really solidified that maybe transitioning could be the solution." When asked, "Were you finding those answers online?" she says yes, that's how she met the activist, and that it "planted the seed that there are people like this that exist".

 

And that is all any of them said on the topic of online influence: that they interacted with trans people online and that changed the way they thought about themselves. In other words, they could have come to this very site! If kids questioning their gender can't come to a site like TransPulse, then where will they be? (And that includes trans groups on Reddit, Facebook, and other sites I don't know, I'm sure.)

 

 

Which kids are you talking about? There are only two parents interviewed and they are speaking about a fourth trans person who is not featured in the show. Granted, the mother describes watching videos of trans influencers, but none of the other people interviewed mention them at all.

 

 

That is a presumption. In the case of Chloe and Mel it is probably accurate. In the case of Courtney, when asked why she detransitioned she says she realised "I live in the real world and I can't be the man I want to be". That strongly suggests a trans identity.

 

So much for the show, but it did get me thinking. As I said above, and as Chloe Cole reiterates, kids feel pressured to rush into medical transition because they don't want to develop secondary sex characteristics. So I suggest the best solution to this would be to change society's stigma around "mismatching" secondary sex characteristics. How can this happen? By normalising trans identity. The more openly trans, non-passing role models kids have, the less they will feel hurried to conform to society's notions of binary gender.

 

The other route, the route you suggest, is a way of appeasing society. This is a way of changing society. And it's so simple: trans pride.

 

Betty, same show, just different perspectives! Online influencers would include places like this, and is why you may notice I often post the negative sides to being trans as I know vulnerable people read our posts. The point is these subjects got their guidance from the internet, rather than the qualified and experienced medical support they should be getting their answers from. Mel actually attended a few zoom socials I run, but we stressed at the start of each session we were not in any way a counselling service. Our discussions were general in nature, and if anything, focussed on the problems and difficulties we faced.

 

While most of the subjects got their treatments as adults, they were initially influenced at young ages. The parents featured highlighted that they were unaware that their child was using their preferred name at school, and this showed that they weren't as involved with their child's life as they should have been. Instead of taking responsibility for their child's development, they are  blaming everybody around them. This is all too common for parents, but they are your kids and your responsibility!

 

All the subjects expressed social discomfort, and while this is also common in trans kids, it is the inner conflict which is important for trans people. They well might all be trans, but their reasons to transition were expressed as for social acceptance and to no longer fear being assaulted. These are not exclusively trans desires. Hopefully, qualified assessment would have isolated these factors and established the inner incongruence before proceeding with trans treatment! 

 

The pressure to get underage trans kids treatments to prevent development of secondary sex characteristics if high on the staff of gender clinics, because they know it will make a huge difference to the self image and social acceptance of the kids, both of which are important and will significantly affect their lives. Humans are a social species, and it is known that lack of social acceptance is a health risk factor. I feel incredibly lucky to live in a society which accepts me as a trans person, but I also know that I am 'othered' in many ways. My chance of having another loving relationship is negligible, and I am made to feel different every time I try to buy clothes off the rack because of my secondary sex characteristics. To change all aspects of society to eliminate this is very unlikely at this time, and would be unlikely ever. 

 

Realistically, we will always be 'different', but I feel our greatest step forward is to be understood, and trans 'pride' just won't make the society wide changes that are needed. I promote trans visibility as a way of normalising us in society, but I realise that our numbers are simply too small to make significant change.

 

Hugs,

 

Allie

 

[Betty K]

@AllieJ, voicing a perspective is one thing; falsely attributing statements to other people to support that perspective is another. The exact definition of “social media influencer” may be debatable, but it certainly doesn’t mean anyone you meet on social media who influences you. More importantly, no-one accused anyone of “making out that transition was a path to social acceptance”. That is a damning accusation. Channel 7 clearly wanted viewers to infer that accusation, but no-one made it. Lastly, when you referred to what “the parents of these young people indicated” that was also false, because the parents of the young people featured in the show were not interviewed. You may think I’m splitting hairs, but when we speak about a subject of such importance, in a cultural climate of such rapidly increasing intolerance, I think it is crucial we be accurate. You may be correct in your interpretation; I am merely objecting to the way you framed it. 
 

4 hours ago, AllieJ said:

The point is these subjects got their guidance from the internet, rather than the qualified and experienced medical support they should be getting their answers from.

 

Okay, if that was your point I can agree with it, up to a point. There was no mention at all of therapy from any of the three detransitioners, but that doesn’t mean they didn’t have therapy. The journalist could have excised that part to make a point, or may just not have asked about therapy. Again, I don’t think that, based on the evidence, we can know.

 

4 hours ago, AllieJ said:

They well might all be trans, but their reasons to transition were expressed as for social acceptance and to no longer fear being assaulted. These are not exclusively trans desires.

 

This is a good point, and I’m sorry I didn’t understand it earlier. I thought you were saying they weren’t trans, but I now see that is not what you said.

 

5 hours ago, AllieJ said:

The pressure to get underage trans kids treatments to prevent development of secondary sex characteristics if high on the staff of gender clinics, because they know it will make a huge difference to the self image and social acceptance of the kids, both of which are important and will significantly affect their lives.

Believe me, I am well aware of this, as I’ve indicated twice already. At the same time, I think too much is made of passing. I can easily imagine a world in which it mightn’t matter so much. Unfortunately, with this backlash (which includes the fears of social contagion that lead to fearmongering around trans influencers) in progress, we seem to be moving further away from it. 
 

5 hours ago, AllieJ said:

Realistically, we will always be 'different', but I feel our greatest step forward is to be understood, and trans 'pride' just won't make the society wide changes that are needed. I promote trans visibility as a way of normalising us in society, but I realise that our numbers are simply too small to make significant change.

I disagree. With numbers of kids identifying as lgbtqia multiplying exponentially and attitudes among their peers becoming correspondingly more accepting, I can easily imagine drastically increased visibility and acceptance. That is, so long as kids are allowed to keep communicating with each other about these issues, both in school and online.

[AllieJ]

Betty, I guess we will need to agree to disagree on these points. While I promote trans visibility, when you take in the number of trans people who pass, or live stealth, or stay as isolated as they can, it really only leaves a small cohort who are actively visible, and of these, there are lots who are OTT and actually create a negative image of our community. Unfortunately, the bulk of society still see us as drag queens because that is the most common public image of gender diverse. I am out and open, and when people meet me they often say that I am not what they expected when they learned I was trans, admitting they expected someone more flamboyant. As us older, usually more readable trans people die off, our community will grow from young people who mostly pass, so the visible trans cohort will get smaller. This is why I believe the future is in educating the community to see we are valid and should be supported.

 

Hugs,

 

Allie

[Betty K]

Yes, we will have to agree to disagree and that is fine. As you said, we trans folk are all very different.

 

I do think you are forgetting one rapidly growing demographic though: non-binary people. I know several young trans people, mostly transmasculine, who are not at all concerned with passing. Some of them started out believing themselves binary trans men and then, once society accepted them as such, began presenting more femininely. Gender looks like many different things these days and I believe, so long as our enemies don’t succeed in exterminating us, it will look like many more in years to come. 
 

I also don’t see a space in the Bed Nucleus theory for non-binary people? 

[AllieJ]

The Bed Nucleus results has a couple of aspects. There is some thought that NB is a position on the transgender spectrum, and many will progress to a more binary position, but also, not everything is posted in the summaries, in fact there were some structures which didn't fit either end of the binary, but the numbers were quite small and wouldn't account for how many NB people there are. More research into both aspects needs to be done.

 

Some supporting theory for Bed Nucleus is that it's function is to sense what is happening around a person and send signals to the rest of the brain to raise or lower anxiety, or to trigger the fight or flight reflex. Since realising that the structure is dimorphic, it fits that the function could also be to sense what is happening around a person, and sending comfortable or uncomfortable feelings (Dysphoria) to the rest of the brain to conform to the Bed Nucleus ID (Gender ID. While this seems logical, it is yet to be properly researched and proven. 

 

Hugs,

 

Allie

[Betty K]

Please excuse me Allie, I can't resist one last question. It's a hypothetical:

 

Say a diagnosis for gender incongruence is introduced that relies on a test related to the Bed Nucleus.

 

Say there are two trans people, both of whom have been out for a number of years and seem relatively well-adjusted and happy.

 

Say they both take the test and one fails.

 

What happens to the one that fails?

[AllieJ]

7 minutes ago, Betty K said:

Please excuse me Allie, I can't resist one last question. It's a hypothetical:

 

Say a diagnosis for gender incongruence is introduced that relies on a test related to the Bed Nucleus.

 

Say there are two trans people, both of whom have been out for a number of years and seem relatively well-adjusted and happy.

 

Say they both take the test and one fails.

 

What happens to the one that fails?

They have the option to do nothing and continue their lives, or start looking for the real reason. The complication would be if they need a diagnosis for funding. 

 

Consider the young child being held back from treatment because they are just not sure if they are trans, and there is a definitive test to enable treatment. How many lives might that save?

 

Hugs,

 

Allie

[Betty K]

2 minutes ago, AllieJ said:

The complication would be if they need a diagnosis for funding. 

 

Yes, that is the complication I'm referring to. I'm curious as to what the answer is. Also curious as to what "start looking for the real reason" means.

 

3 minutes ago, AllieJ said:

Consider the young child being held back from treatment because they are just not sure if they are trans, and there is a definitive test to enable treatment. How many lives might that save?

 

Are you aware of this situation happening often? And whether it often leads to suicide? I would guess that the suicide risk would be higher in kids who were denied treatment because they failed the test. What about them?