Wow, this warms my heart. With everything feeling so heavy lately, it is happy, uplifting news to see. ~ Lilis 💗

Erin In The Morning hit this one hard.   https://www.erininthemorning.com/p/washington-post-shamefully-endorses?fbclid=IwY2xjawKPpjFleHRuA2FlbQIxMABicmlkETE1bndzVDc2U3RGU1JHeXpOAR710Ra4bOrsHsKT-Fu6G3WHig7iVdhGo0jDRM7hcFf182nhrhj8aruxSmjyBA_aem_u7rEJuyo6TNu0Cg5UAfrXw   Added fuel to the controlled burn backfire.

Well, its an op-ed piece.  Worth what we paid for it, I guess.  I gleaned a few things from it.   Trump talks about "junk science" and I think its a good term.  There's a lot of junk science out there, even in supposedly prestigious peer-reviewed journals such as JAMA.  Its an aspect of our culture, really, and not limited to any single side of an issue.  Studies with small sample sizes, location issues, seemingly omnipresent conflicts of interest, and difficulties with repeatability.  I'm no scholar - I have a functioning high school education.  But when I can spot problems in the stuff that I read - how is it that these PhD types missed the basics?    How much of this junk science is going on in the area of trans healthcare?  I'd guess probably no more than any other field.  We'd be correct to call out junk science when it shows up, but incorrect to specifically target one issue more than others.    I'm not surprised that WPATH could be involved in some fishy stuff.  In my opinion, basically everything with "World" in its name is automatically suspicious, and probably serving the leftist/globalist/etc set of agendas.  They present themselves as a professional association, but a significant portion of their members are non-physician activists.  Perhaps they present some good information, but they cannot be viewed as impartial or exclusively scientific.    In my opinion, we have to accept that we have less impartial, trustworthy, useful science than we would prefer.  In the middle of a politically clouded issue, there's a different way to argue for what we need:  Personal rights, family rights, and general civil liberties are the most useful angle.  But that goes against the grain for followers of both major political parties.  For some reason, people just love asking the government for permission, while encouraging that same government to deny permission to their political opponents.    Either you have bodily autonomy or you don't.  Either you can make choices for your family or you can't.  Either you have the right to purchase what you need and want, or you don't.  Either the medical profession exists to serve paying customers, or it exists to puff itself up as an "authority."  You either have life, liberty, and property, or you're a subject.  It doesn't matter if the issue is trans healthcare, abortion, hiring the doctor of your choice, firing that doctor and getting a different one who will do what you need, refusing vaccines, buying lifesaving medicine, or choosing not to take medicine at all.  The principle is the same.  Until the majority of the people realize that liberty must be absolute for everybody in these most sensitive personal areas, regardless of family style or overall political persuasion, then liberty will not exist.    Yes, its extreme to say it.  But I recall a quote, "Extremism in defense of liberty is no vice.  Moderation in pursuit of justice is no virtue." 

Thank you for sharing that, Kat. It’s a blessing to have someone steady and supportive like your sister by your side through surgery and revision. And wow, passing the real-life test without hormones, good for you, especially back then when the expectations were so rigid and so limited. And thank you for your kind words. I’m taking things one day at a time. There’s a lot going on right now for me, balancing transition, work, and family, so my time feels like a rare resource these days. Just rolling with the punches and doing my best, and it feels good to be back. ~ Lilis 💗

@MaeBe, @Carolyn Marie Pulled this out from behind a paywall for us to see the whole thing without it costing us individually.  She mentions that in her lead paragraph.  The quotes from this are not hers, they are from the mush piece directly. Your points in meeting them are accurate in my mind though.  I will only add that my suspicion is that the infamous 400 pages were written about a year ago and not in this calendar year.    

Welcome to the Forums.   I am not sure what you mean by You now have your first post, at your 6th post you will be off of full moderation and able to edit your profile and use our personal mail system.  We do not allow members to edit their own posts ever, but the Staff of Moderators and Admins will be happy to help you there, PM us and ask, and if it is within our rules we do it happily for you.  You are posting in a good place here.  The lines of CDing and simply living Trans are pretty loose and we do not assign labels to you here, that is your thing alone.  Look around see what you find helpful and go ahead and post questions.  We keep things kind of tame here since we do have folks between 13 and 18 but they are welcome.  

Ignorant people who haven't seen a trans kid and probably couldn't tell you what being trans means. Sure, it makes them feel good to protect the kids. The orange juice lady had the house fraus and workin' joes all up in a tizzy about homosexuals in the same way. People are dumb.

I’m new to this site and idrk how this stuff works or if I’m even making a post correctly but  i wanted to discuss with others how it is crossdressing while being FtM (for reference I’m bigender but i identify as FtM so i consider it crossdressing). I feel like it’s kind of hard to do because people kind of look at us and go “you can’t be trans because you dress up like your agab!” and then also confuse trans men for femboys when they’re not femboys, just afab (we can obviously be femboys but ykwim).    hopefully i did this right 😔 i want to be able to edit my pfp

We have it.   It's a political fluff piece, there's as much science in it as there was in the Kelly LeBrock vehicle from the 80s.   You cannot do a trial with youth that knowingly causes harm.   Mostly with those that see "lack of return" as proof of "decisistance".   Conjecture, the whole of this and next paragraph. "A study wasn't published"? Why because it was created with bad science or to start at a conclusion and walk backwards from there? There are plenty of research papers that don't get pushed through and what if this was just some religious nutjob who wanted to shove rosaries down peoples throats and see if the power of god could expel their trans demons?   Calling the HHS hit piece "fair and balanced" is like saying the other thing that's called "fair and balanced" actually is.   Yes, 90 days set by a deadline by a psychotic president who wants nothing but sycophantic yes-isms was sure to be a rock solid report. Also, never mind the people that HAVE been determined to edit the document aren't even doctors in the field and are known anti-trans activists.   Ahh, this old chestnut. "We are afraid of the people that will call us names". Fierce backlash, hah. Tell that to the parents of the kids that never got care. Tell that to their graves.   But the Orange One isn't funding ANY research and sure as -crap- won't be funding trans research. But maybe he'd fund reports that are designed to fit his policy that work backward from there...   The government should demand specific outcomes and fund them, check.   Where are the author's citations, the manifold footnotes for studies that are poor? Ignoring the massive amount of new studies that are showing the opposite of what they portend. Never mind the 90,000 trans people surveyed. Never mind half of Europe giving the US, the UK, and effing Putin the middle finger.   Please @Carolyn Marie, I really hope you were being ironic when you thought this love letter to RFK Jr.'s "study" was worthy of consideration. It's an OpEd "just asking questions" with veiled plaudits for the HHS junk report. There may very well be good, new, ways to help treat children with GD but this author doesn't want that. They want trans care shut down forever, because this is just a long dog whistle.

Oh dear, I hope you’re doing all right Ivy. I think there is a good argument for avoiding news you cannot influence, especially in times of personal crisis. Wishing you peace and perseverance. X Bette

I need to avoid the news better after my time on the psych ward. It's never good.

Because, of course.

Back before the election, he was at a rally in NC, Greensboro I think, where seemed amazed at the reaction to bringing up trans people.  I hate it when he smiles like that.  It always means trouble for someone.

Seems like a more accurate term could be "mandatory detransition on paperwork" or something like that. 

I didn't find any information in that article about the sample size used for the study, the locations where data was gathered, or other information that we would use to determine whether the results of the study are useful or not. No idea whether this is biased in any particular direction.

Oh good lord in a rusty Ford.  A "drug" that was NEVER "double blind" studied but was famous for its success and keeps on ticking, is Human Insulin for Diabetes.  Get over it folks.  Don't give HRT to your children, hey, I never got it!!  Yes, I am alive and out the $50K that I spent on my non-insurance-covered surgery at age 65.  Heaven knows I wish it could have been different. The 50K does not include the costs of my abuse of alcohol and damage done that way  (10K++ in legal costs and necessary time in a "state institution" -- ICYW).    I often come into contact with the patients that were under Dr. Olsen-Kennedy's through a group known as Angels Of Change and know why the doctor's findings came out as they do.  Her patients from the beginning had the support of their parents and care givers, and gave them the non-HRT treatments they also needed.  The puberty blockers alone were not that important for her patients and thus no large scale improvement in their health.  In fact, I have a beautiful calendar on the wall near me with pictures of some of the now young adult patients from that program and a few years ago was proud to be a Madrina (God Mother) for a young Trans Woman at her Qinceanera four years ago.  SIGH!!!  

Welcome to the forums @Aydhindril!

Today, I decided to wear my binder to school for the first time, and since I already had short hair, I looked male (yippee!). Everything was going great until the bus ride home. The kids behind me kept pulling at my hair (I have a sensitive scalp), so I pulled my hood up. However, they pulled it down, and I snapped, yelling, "Stop pulling my hair!" After that, I moved to an open seat a few rows ahead, but I could still hear them talking, saying things like, "OMG, I thought she was a boy," and mocking me. Honestly, I'm surprised I didn't say something worse since I have a short fuse. Now I'm home, sitting in my bed (I had to take my binder off because I was wearing it for almost eight hours), and I'm on the verge of tears and feeling sick. I had tried my best to stay invisible to everyone except my friend group, but of course, it had to be ruined by some kids who can't keep their hands to themselves.

Thank all of you for your kind words! It is a good question why people missgender me. Even my partner wonders. Also I value your honest words. It's good to read that it's a marathon since I obviously wish for a quicker change. It's not only misgerndering but also physical dysphoria that i hope HRT will help me with. Since years I now use medical breast prothesis, at times I even sleep with my boobs. I can't do that a lot since it leads to quite bad bruises (had that a couple of times). So I hope to be lucky and grow somewhat decent breasts, by that i mean european B which is American A cup size. The Doctor I go to was recommended to my and has a good reputation. I'll keep you updated Michi

The Washington Post has a paywall so I normally bypass their stories.  But this editorial is important for us to read.  It takes a reasonable and (IMO) fair approach to the HHS study of the current literature.  I know this will engender fierce debate, but I would caution against knee jerk reactions.  I don't think we, as a community, gain much by saying that anything that isn't completely supportive of current trans youth medical practices is nonsense or hateful discrimination.  That is especially important if, as this editorial points out, the WPATH has interfered with or blocked the publication of some studies that had results it didn't like.  Anyway, here is the full editorial.   Good Questions About Transgender Care President Donald Trump never chooses careful, neutral language when he can bring out his flamethrower. In January, when his administration issued an executive order on pediatric medical gender transition, it was titled “Protecting Children from Chemical and Surgical Mutilation.” The text proceeded in the same vein: Rather than say doctors have been performing interventions for which the evidence of effectiveness is inadequate, he said they are “maiming and sterilizing a growing number of impressionable children” based on “Junk Science.” This hyperbole is not helpful to anyone, especially not young people and their families. What’s needed instead is better evidence and reasoned discussion about the trade-offs involved in intervening with the biological process of puberty in children who experience gender dysphoria. The good news is that the executive order provided some of what is too often missing in the debate over transgender medical care for children. It directed the secretary of health and human services to publish a review of the existing literature on best practices within 90 days, and this review is now out. Clocking in at more than 400 pages, including appendixes, the HHS report is a careful, thorough and definitely skeptical tour through the subject, including the history of gender medicine, the evolution of pediatric interventions, the evidence for pediatric medical transition, and the ethical conundrums that researchers and practitioners face. Critics have been scathing about what they see as the report’s bias and shortcomings. But it makes a legitimate case for caution that policymakers need to wrestle with. The HHS document concurs with other systematic reviews, including Britain’s Cass Review report, that the existing research is inadequate to validate medical interventions for gender dysphoric youth. In studying the use of hormones, puberty blockers and surgery, researchers should have started with small, randomized, controlled trials and, if those were successful, gradually expanded the patient population through more such trials to establish effectiveness and refine best practices. Instead, encouraging results from small trials that were neither randomized nor controlled helped fuel a growing number of interventions at clinics around the world, where practice may vary significantly from the studied protocol. Subsequent research has been marred by various methodological flaws, including inadequate study of how patients fare years or decades after they begin treatment. Variations in practice among pediatric gender clinics and shifting patient populations limit the usefulness of what research exists. More concerning is the possibility that some researchers have not published all their results — including findings that turn out not to support their hypotheses. Discovery documents in a lawsuit over Alabama’s restrictions on pediatric medical transition suggest that the World Professional Association for Transgender Health interfered with systematic reviews it commissioned from a research team at Johns Hopkins University. According to the HHS report, “WPATH’s policy appears to have effectively blocked the planned and completed research — including critical evidence appraisals — from being developed into publishable manuscripts.” And in October, Johanna Olson-Kennedy, director of the gender clinic at the Children’s Hospital of Los Angeles, told the New York Times that she had delayed publishing the results of an NIH-funded study she conducted in part because she feared that its results would be “weaponized.” The HHS report lays out these concerns in clear and careful language, and describes the ethical quandaries involved in intervening in the sexual development of minors, who might not be mature enough to give fully informed consent. Critics who dispute the report’s conclusion raise valid concerns about its process. The 90 days allotted to produce such a report is a remarkably short time. To be sure, the authors drew on earlier reviews that came to similar conclusions about the strength of the evidence. But they also declined to publish their names, and their anonymity stands to weaken their credibility with the public. Presumably, one reason they kept their names secret was because the underlying issue is so heated and polarized: A fierce activist backlash awaits anyone who calls for greater emphasis on psychotherapy in treating gender dysphoric youth. (Critics deride this approach as “conversion therapy.”) What is clear is that, with many gender transition procedures ongoing and fierce debate over their effectiveness, better research is needed, and the government should be called on to support this work. Better research means randomized and controlled studies that compare the effectiveness of the medical path with that of the best alternative psychotherapies. Today’s clinicians should be involved in this effort — after all, they have gained a wealth of clinical knowledge and have demonstrated their strong interest in helping children with gender dysphoria — but the research should be overseen by people who have no personal stake in the findings. In return for funding the work, the government should demand specific outcome measures in advance and prompt publication of data. Given the weakness of the evidence that has been gathered to date, no one can predict what rigorous research will show. It is already obvious, however, that children dealing with gender dysphoria deserve better information and less disagreement over the path forward.