Large Study Shows Only .1 % of Teens Receive Gender-Affirming Care

[Carolyn Marie]

https://www.npr.org/sections/shots-health-news/2025/01/06/nx-s1-5247724/transgender-teens-gender-affirming-care-hormones-jama

 

 

This won't convince anyone on the right that trans youth are not endangering themselves or that transgenderism isn't an epidemic.  But it might convince a few non-Republican politicians that being trans isn't a pandemic and isn't something to fear.

 

Carolyn Marie

[awkward-yet-sweet]

It ought to be obvious to anybody with a brain.  After all, we're a minority of a minority. 

 

I do think this is an area where the media isn't very helpful.  We're the constant topic of discussion.  Its similar to how everybody is scared of terrorist attacks.  We see it all the time on TV... when in reality more folks die from bee stings every year than from terrorism, but nobody stays awake at night worrying about bees. 

[Mirrabooka]

Just now, awkward-yet-sweet said:

I do think this is an area where the media isn't very helpful. 

Sort of!

 

There are definitely areas where the media give far too much oxygen to stuff that doesn't deserve it, but I see nothing wrong with highlighting that only a tiny percentage of a cohort, no matter how small that cohort is, is missing out on vital health care. Transgenderism has nothing to do with it. It's no different to over here, there have been news stories for example about a dire shortage of estrogen patches for the low percentage of menopausal women who have been prescribed them to deal with debilitating symptoms. Another example is which drugs have just made the subsidized list, which might only apply to a few hundred people nationwide. It's still noteworthy.

 

But yes, the media often seems fixated on stuff that they shouldn't bother with. Over here, there is an inordinate amount of time being devoted to a certain geriatric, carrot-wigged, supposedly incontinent buffoon with tiny hands who lives far, far away. Inordinate.

Just now, awkward-yet-sweet said:

We see it all the time on TV... when in reality more folks die from bee stings every year than from terrorism, but nobody stays awake at night worrying about bees. 

Spot on. Figures are skewed though since 9/11. If I lived over your way, I would be far more worried about being shot, which is 50x more likely than here.

[Ivy]

This level of attention on a very small, and essentially harmless minority is absurd.

I suppose it's easy to demonize a tiny minority that most people never have any (knowing) interaction with, and usually only see negatively on rightwing media.

[Vidanjali]

First, just want to caution against the use of the term "transgenderism". We are not an "ism" (as in a system, principle, or ideological movement); we are people who wish to live lives of dignity, safety, and wellness.

 

"A recent mental health survey from the CDC found a much higher percentage — 3% of high school students — self-identified as transgender. Not all transgender people seek a medical diagnosis or treatments related to their identity, notes Lindsey Dawson, director of LGBTQ health policy at the research organization KFF. 'Much more common is to change hair grooming, style of clothing, using a different name,' she says, pointing to KFF research."

 

3% trans-identifying with 0.1% receiving medical treatment. Still, policy and law makers also seek to make the change in hair grooming, clothing style, name, pronouns, etc. illegal too. 

 

"The American Principles Project, a conservative political advocacy group that has opposed transgender policy for years, is likely to push for a ban on gender-affirming care for minors under the Trump administration, Jon Schweppe, policy director at the organization told NPR in November. 'We've poll tested that, and we're pretty confident that the American people agree,' Schweppe says."

 

Well sure, when you predicate such a poll with false information vilifying trans people, you'll get the expected results.

[Betty K]

I’m glad this article exists but I wish journalists would be more careful with their use of language. Whereas the article refers to “gender affirming care” the correct term would have been “gender affirming medical care”. Mistakes like this allow our enemies to deliberately sow confusion, because far more than 0.1% of kids access gender affirming care (which includes psychological treatment).  

[Vidanjali]

Just now, Betty K said:

which includes psychological treatment

 

Thanks for commenting - I was wondering about that aspect. I would hope more than 0.1% of youth receive gender affirming psychological care.

[Betty K]

Just now, Vidanjali said:

 

Thanks for commenting - I was wondering about that aspect. I would hope more than 0.1% of youth receive gender affirming psychological care.

They certainly do. The study only looked into HRT and puberty blockers.

[Mirrabooka]

10 hours ago, Vidanjali said:

First, just want to caution against the use of the term "transgenderism". We are not an "ism" (as in a system, principle, or ideological movement); we are people who wish to live lives of dignity, safety, and wellness.

I apologize to everyone for using terminology that was wrong. I attempted to come up with a word that described things in an umbrella sense, but I was clumsy. My ignorance of 'isms' is no excuse; I should have known. I can see now that the word could even be offensive or at least triggering. I'm sorry. Thank you for alerting me @Vidanjali, I am now better educated as a result.

 

It's not the only thing I messed up in my earlier post either - I should have said that "I see nothing wrong with highlighting that only a tiny percentage of a cohort, no matter how small that cohort is, is missing out on getting vital health care" for the reason that it highlights that the percentage is too low.

[Betty K]

@Mirrabooka, “transness” is useful in these situations.

[Vidanjali]

39 minutes ago, Mirrabooka said:

I apologize to everyone for using terminology that was wrong. I attempted to come up with a word that described things in an umbrella sense, but I was clumsy. My ignorance of 'isms' is no excuse; I should have known. I can see now that the word could even be offensive or at least triggering. I'm sorry. Thank you for alerting me @Vidanjali, I am now better educated as a result.

 

It's not the only thing I messed up in my earlier post either - I should have said that "I see nothing wrong with highlighting that only a tiny percentage of a cohort, no matter how small that cohort is, is missing out on getting vital health care" for the reason that it highlights that the percentage is too low.

 

Just now, Betty K said:

@Mirrabooka, “transness” is useful in these situations.

 

No worries @Mirrabooka. Yes indeed, my intention was only to educate and empower, so thank you for responding with such grace. 

 

I agree with Bette, I also like to use "transness". Lol, as a bonus, just now as I wrote "transness", the phrase, "your royal transness", for some reason came to mind. 😉👑

[Mirrabooka]

15 hours ago, Vidanjali said:

I agree with Bette, I also like to use "transness".

Thank you for your suggestion @Betty K, and your understanding @Vidanjali.

[VickySGV]

21 hours ago, Vidanjali said:

I agree with Bette, I also like to use "transness". Lol, as a bonus, just now as I wrote "transness", the phrase, "your royal transness", for some reason came to mind.

 

Change "royal" to "loyal" and I think you've got something there.