#The WPATH Files

[religion-is-a-mental-illness]

By: Gerald Posner

Published: Mar 4, 2024

Newly leaked files from the world’s leading transgender health-care organization reveal it is pushing hormonal and surgical transitions for minors, including stomach-wrenching experimental procedures designed to create sexless bodies that resemble department-store mannequins.

The World Professional Association for Transgender Health documents demonstrate it’s controlled by gender ideologues who push aside concerns about whether children and adolescents can consent to medical treatments that WPATH members privately acknowledge often have devastating and permanent side effects.

Yet the US government, American doctors and prominent organizations nonetheless rely on WPATH guidelines for advice on treating our youth.

The files — jaw-dropping conversations from a WPATH internal messaging board and a video of an Identity Evolution Workshop panel — were provided to journalist Michael Shellenberger, who shared the documents with me.

Shellenberger’s nonprofit Environmental Progress will release a scathing summary report, comparing the WPATH promotion of “the pseudoscientific surgical destruction of healthy genitals in vulnerable people” to the mid-20th-century use of lobotomies, “the pseudoscientific surgical destruction of healthy brains.”

‘Arbitrary’ age limits

The comparison to one of history’s greatest medical scandals is not hyperbole.

It is particularly true, as the files show repeatedly, when it involves WPATH’s radical approach to minors.

When the organization adopted in 2022 its current Standards of Care — relied on by the National Institutes of Health, the World Health Organization and every major American medical and psychiatric association — it scrapped a draft chapter about ethics and removed minimum-age requirements for children starting puberty blockers or undergoing sexual-modification surgeries.

It had previously recommended 16 to start hormones and 17 for surgery.

Not surprisingly, age comes up frequently in the WPATH files, from concerns about whether a developmentally delayed 13-year-old can start on puberty blockers to whether the growth of a 10-year-old girl will be stunted by hormones.

During one conversation, a member asked for advice about a 14-year-old patient, a boy who identified as a girl and had begun transitioning at 4.

The child insisted on a vaginoplasty, a surgery that removes the penis, testicles and scrotum and repositions tissue to create a nonfunctioning pseudo-vagina. It requires a lifetime of dilation. Was he too young at 14?

Marci Bowers, WPATH’s president and a California-based pelvic and gynecologic surgeon who is herself transgender, said she considered any age limit “arbitrary.”

But she would not do it. Why?

“The tissue is too immature, dilation routine too critical.”

In lay terms, that means boys who are too young do not have enough penal tissue for the surgery and the surgeon must harvest intestinal lining to build the faux vagina. Even Bowers admits that can lead to “problematic surgical outcomes.”

She would know since she has performed more than 2,000 vaginoplasties. Her highest-profile patient is 17-year-old Jazz Jennings, the transgender star of reality TV show “I Am Jazz.”

Three corrective surgeries were required to fix problems from the original vaginoplasty.

“She had a very difficult surgical course,” Bowers admitted in a 2022 appearance on the show. “We knew it would be tough — it turned out tougher than any of us imagined.”

Still, Bowers told her colleagues in the internal discussion forum of the best age for an adolescent to undergo surgery: “sometime before the end of high school does make some sense in that they are under the watch of parents in the home they grew up in.”

Christine McGinn, a Pennsylvania plastic surgeon and herself transgender, agreed. McGinn has performed “about 20 vaginoplasties in patients under 18” and thinks the “ideal time in the U.S. is surgery the summer before the last year of high school. I have heard many other surgeons echo this.”

Waiting until teens are older than 18 and in college is problematic, she said: “there are too many stressors in college that limit patients’ ability to dilate.”

Dangers downplayed

WPATH assures patients that surgical and hormonal interventions are tested and safe. It is a different matter in private.

President Bowers, for instance, said publicly in 2022 that puberty blockers are “completely reversible,” although in the internal forum she conceded it is “in its infancy.”

What about children who are infertile for life since they started hormone blockers before they reached puberty?

Bowers told her colleagues the “fertility question has no research.”

At other stages, members talk frankly about the complications for the transition surgery for girls, a phalloplasty in which a nonfunctioning pseudo-penis is fashioned from either forearm or thigh tissue.

It requires a full hysterectomy and surgical removal of the vagina. They also discuss other serious consequences, including pelvic inflammatory disease, vaginal atrophy, abnormal pap tests and incontinence.

A 16-year-old girl who had been on puberty blockers for several years before she was put on testosterone for a year had developed two liver tumors that an oncologist concluded the hormones had caused. Another member described “a young patient on testosterone for 3 years” who had developed “vaginal/pelvic pain/spotting . . . [and] atrophy with the persistent yellow discharge.”

Several colleagues described patients with similar conditions, some with debilitating bowel problems or bleeding and excruciating pain during sex (“feeling like broken glass”).

Vaginal estrogen creams and moisturizers as well as hyaluronic acid suppositories “can be helpful.”

One WPATH member seemed surprised: “The transgender people under my surveillance do not complain about this matter. However, I confess that I have never asked them about it.”

Rise of ‘de-gender’ surgery

The litany of transition surgery’s side effects did not stop WPATH from endorsing far more radical “nullification” surgeries for patients who do not feel either male or female and identify only as nonbinary.

Several dozen so-called “de-gendering” surgeries are designed to create a sexless, smooth cosmetic appearance that is unknown in nature. There is even an experimental “bi-genital” surgery that attempts to construct a second set of genitals.

In 2017, when tabloids reported a 22-year-old man had spent $50,000 to surgically remove his sex organs so he could “transform into a genderless extra-terrestrial,” it seemed a one-off oddity.

But WPATH has enshrined that concept in its Standard of Care — the same document in which the group endorsed for the time first time chemical or surgical castration for patients who identify as eunuchs. (WPATH even linked to the Eunuch Archives, where men anonymously share castration fetishes.)

These science-fiction-like surgeries are not only reserved for adults.

“How do we come up with appropriate standards for non-binary patients?” asked Thomas Satterwhite, a San Francisco-based plastic surgeon who has operated on dozens of patients younger than 18 since 2014. “I’ve found more and more patients recently requesting ‘non-standard’ procedures.”

What are nonstandard procedures? They include “non-binary top surgery,” a mastectomy without nipples. There are brutal procedures for girls that eliminate all or part of the vagina and for boys that amputate the penis, scrotum and testicles.

The goal, as one San Francisco surgical clinic proclaims on its website, “is a smooth, neutral body that is cosmetically free of sexual identification.” On TikTok the trend is called a “flat front.”

‘Too young to understand‘

A particularly intense subject of discussion was whether minors could understand the lifelong consequences of their gender treatments. Minors are presumed by law to be incapable of making an informed decision about having a vasectomy or tubal ligation.

Gender surgeries are an exception, however.

WPATH’s Standard of Care allows all procedures so long as the minor “demonstrates the emotional and cognitive maturity required to provide informed consent/assent for the treatment.”

In a May 2022 internal workshop, “Identity Evolution,” WPATH members conceded that was all but impossible.

Daniel Metzger, the British Columbia endocrinologist who cowrote the Canadian Pediatric Society’s position paper on health care for trans minors, said, “I think the thing you have to remember about kids is that we’re often explaining these sorts of things to people who haven’t even had biology in high school yet.”

Metzger noted adolescents are incapable of appreciating the lifelong consequence of infertility. “It’s always a good theory that you talk about fertility preservation with a 14-year-old,” he said, “but I know I’m talking to a blank wall. They’d be like, ‘ew, kids, babies, gross.’ Or, the usual answer is, ‘I’m just going to adopt.’ And then you ask them, ‘Well, what does that involve? Like, how much does it cost?’ ‘Oh, I thought you just like went to the orphanage, and they gave you a baby.’ . . . I think now that I follow a lot of kids into their mid-twenties, I’m always like, ‘Oh, the dog isn’t doing it for you, right?’”

There is extensive research showing adolescent brains are wired to have little control over rash behavior and are not capable of grasping the magnitude of decisions with lifelong consequences. It is why society doesn’t allow teens to get tattoos or buy guns. Car-rental agencies set 25 as the minimum age for renting a car, and Sweden sets the same limit for deciding on sterilization.

Detransitioners ignored, shunned

Although many WPATH members privately doubt that adolescents can give truly informed consent to life-altering procedures, they must affirm whatever children say about their gender.

Unless, the WPATH files disclose, the patient wants to reverse course and become a so-called detransitioner.

WPATH members mostly dismiss those cases as insignificant or overblown by the media and question whether minors who want to revert to their birth sex really understand what they are doing.

It’s a question that would never be asked for minors who declared themselves to be gender dysphoric.

One case involved a 17-year-old boy, just graduated from high school, who had been on testosterone for two years. He was reported to be “very distraught and angry. He reports he feels he was brainwashed and is upset by the permanent changes to his body.”

A self-described “queer therapist” did not believe any young person could be brainwashed. “In my experience, those stories come from people who have an active agenda against the rights of trans people.”

WPATH President Bowers said that “I do see talk of the phenomenon [detransitioners] as distracting from the many challenges we face.”

‘Frankenstein files’

The leaked files put a spotlight on the danger of mixing ideological activism with medicine and science. They should serve as an urgent wakeup call for the medical associations and government agencies that rely on WPATH guidance for transgender health.

The files might even prompt investigations into how those with distorted personal agendas seized control of the organization at the expense of science and patients.

Investigating what has gone wrong at WPATH might prove uncomfortable for some gender progressives in the Biden administration, none more so than Adm. Rachel Levine, the assistant secretary for health. Levine, the first transgender four-star military officer, is a WPATH member and has lavished praise on the organization.

She says it “assesses the full state of the science and provides substantive, rigorously analyzed, peer-reviewed recommendations to the medical community on how best to care for patients who are transgender or gender non-binary. It is free of any agenda other than to ensure that medical decisions are informed by science.”

Either Levine is unaware of the hormonal and surgical experimentation the group promotes or refuses to acknowledge it.

“The Frankenstein files.”

That is how a pediatrician described the leaked documents after I shared them with her.

Unfortunately, this is no horror novel.

It is a medical travesty playing out in real time, and the casualties are our children.

#Gerald Posner #Michael Shellenberger #WPATH #World Professional Association for Transgender Health #Mia Hughes #WPATH Files #The WPATH Files #medical corruption #medical malpractice #medical scandal #unethical #gender ideology #gender identity ideology #queer theory #first do no harm #religion is a mental illness

[thearbourist]

The WPATH Files - Medical Malpractice - Pgs 33 - 34

Get the WPATH files here. This is big folks.  The WPATH files show exactly how unscientific gender medicine is.  It is a travesty that a ‘professional association’ could be so irresponsible.  But see for yourself. Link to the analysis.

View On WordPress

#Gender Affirming Care is Dangerous Quackery #Quackery #The WPATH files

[vavandeveresfan]

J.K. Rowling has been proven right!

"The Cass Review is a damning indictment of what the NHS has been doing to children.

"Dr Hilary Cass has submitted her final report and recommendations to NHS England in her role as Chair of the Independent Review of gender identity services for children and young people.

"Hilary Cass’s report demolishes the entire basis for the current model of treating gender-distressed children. Its publication is a shameful day for NHS England, which for too long gave vulnerable children harmful treatments for which there was no evidence base. It’s now clear to all that this was quack medicine from the start. 

"Dr Cass delivers stinging criticisms of NHS gender clinics, both adult and child, and her description of the Gender Identity Development Service is absolutely damning. It is disgraceful that GIDS, alongside the adult clinics, did not cooperate with her attempt to survey its practice, or to carry out a high-quality, long-term follow-up study on the treatment of children as part of the review, which would have been a global first."

You can read the entire review here. (pdf)

"Glinner" is Graham Linehan, a writer, screenwriter, and comedian who's been fighting against transitioning minors for years, losing friends, his job, and his agent along the way. But he's kept on fighting.

,

;

.

.

The tide has turned in the UK and in Europe. When will American media finally begin reporting on the closing of "gender clinics" and the bans on puberty blockers for children? I figure nothing will happen here in the U.S. until the lawsuits start flooding in. It's already begun. And with proof like the Cass Review and the WPATH files, it's going to be very, very difficult for clinics, doctors, and therapists to continue lying about how transitioning does no permanent and irreversible physical and psychological harm.

#Cass Review #transing kids #JK Rowling #I stand with JK Rowling #Graham Linehan #trans lies #WPATH #WPATH files #gender critical #gender clinics #health #medicine #the tide has turned #David Tennant

[vaspider]

You'll probably see these "WPATH Files" trotted out a lot in the coming months. It's important to know what's actually in them and be armed with facts. Fortunately, Erin Reed has gone over them.

#lgbtq #trans #transgender #trans issues #wpath files

[paranoir-antares]

whistleblowers leak a bunch of documents demonstrating that doctors are consciously and intentionally taking advantage of trans people, consciously and intentionally pushing experimental expensive treatments without proven benefits, consciously and intentionally sacrificing their trans patients' health and wellbeing for profit

immediately, stupid people:

"somehow, jkr is to blame"

#wpath files #jk rowling #it would seem that jkr shows a lot more empathy and compassion for trans people than other trans people do #and somehow only the gender critical crowd is angry at the doctors who are Actively Taking Advantage of Their Trans Patients #GEE I WONDER WHY

[nothing-makes--sense]

Fact Check: Fact Check: 216 Instances Of Factual Errors Found In Right-Wing "WPATH Files" Document

In response to the WPATH files being dropped, transgender activist Erin Reed made a response, fact checking the claims made in the editorial of the original document, written by Mia Hughes. Reed claims that there are 216 “instances of factual inaccuracies, erroneous citations, misinterpretations of what is “leaked,” and purposeful omissions contradicting the authors central editorialized claims.”

The introduction is spent discrediting the organizations involved as “right wing” and “anti trans.” Reed alleges that the quick rate at which the files were spread was a “coordinated and organized embargo campaign, leaving those in support of care with scant time to review the voluminous documents and respond.”

The first claim that Reed alleges to be false is the claim that the Beyond WPATH declaration was signed by many people who were not doctors, pointing out signatures with occupations such as “DJ” and “yoga instructor” as well as comments like “concerned parent.” The original document does not claim that all signatures were from doctors, with the exact quote stating that it was “now signed by over 2,000 concerned individuals, many of whom are clinicians working with gender diverse young people.” (bold text mine). Nowhere does it imply that only doctors were able to sign it, it simply acknowledges that many people who signed the petition were doctors. One important thing to note is that the creator of the petition, Dr. Joseph Burgo, alleges that the petition was hijacked by trans activists adding fake signatures. (timestamp: 16 min)

Here is a screenshot of the top signers of the petition. Highlighted are all medical professionals.

Note that one of the signers, Stephen B. Levine, was a former president of WPATH who left due to the organization becoming less evidence based and more focused on activists.

Next, Reed criticizes the quality of the citations, stating, "When addressing supposedly "scientific" citations, the report's performance is equally lacking." One example given is an article from The Guardian from 2004, and another being “a conservative site called "The New Atlantis, " Upon visiting the link to the New Atlantis’s “about” page, they explicitly state they are a nonpartisan organization. That being said, other sources do allege this particular publication is right wing. However, this attempt to frame any opposing source as "right wing" or "conservative" is a significant part of Reed's argument on why the information is unreliable.

Reed accuses many of the studies cited to be misrepresented. One study cited in the WPATH files is a Swedish study which is quoted as finding, “rates of completed suicide post-surgical transition to be greatly elevated over the general population.”

Reed links to an article from a site called Trans Advocate, which contains an interview with the author of the Swedish study on how her work has been misinterpreted. In this article, the study is quoted as saying, “no inferences can be drawn as to the effectiveness of sex reassignment as a treatment for transsexualism. In other words, the results should not be interpreted such as sex reassignment per se increases morbidity and mortality.” The study does not conclude that sex reassignment surgery works, but there is also no reason to suggest it causes people to be more suicidal than they were pre-transition. Hughes does imply that suicide risk can increase after transition in cases where certain mental health conditions such as BPD are left untreated, and the patient comes to regret transition later, but this is not cited as scientific fact (42).

On the page before the Swedish study is referenced (42), Hughes discusses the mental health issues commonly found in trans-identified youth and how those issues may account for the higher rate of suicidality. Reed fails to acknowledge the Amsterdam study that concluded “the suicide risk in transgender people is higher than in the general population and seems to occur at every stage of transitioning.” While some parts of the Swedish study may have been misinterpreted, there are other studies with similar findings. The point is not that suicidality increases after transition, but rather that there is little evidence to suggest that transition has a long-term benefit on a person's other mental health issues.

Reed links to three studies disputing both the 2009 study and the Swedish study, implying that all of this “much newer research from peer-reviewed articles,” completely invalidates the findings of the other studies. The first study that Reed gives as a rebuttal does not actually come to the conclusion that there is a “substantial improvement in the quality of life for transgender individuals.” This 2017 study concludes that, “Our results show that transgender women generally have a lower QoL compared to the general population. GRS leads to an improvement in general well-being as a trend but over the long-term, QoL decreases slightly in line with that of the comparison group.” Basically, it claims that quality of life increases shortly after surgery, but later declines after about 5 years. They acknowledge that this is the case in the general population as well, and they state that there is still little consensus on trans identified people’s quality of life.

The second study Reed cites looks at the quality of life of patients who have received phalloplasties. Only 32 patients were part of this study, and they found that “88% of our patients were very satisfied with the aesthetic result, 75% have had sex after surgery, and 72% were very satisfied with sexual function after GAS. Eighty-one percent had a strong improvement of QOL, and 91% would undergo the same treatment again.” However, there is more evidence that phalloplasty is a dangerous procedure, and Reed fails to acknowledge any of those studies, such as this study of 1731 phalloplasty patients, finding that the "Overall complication rate was high at 76.5%"

The third study was a survey of 27,715 trans identified adults from 2015. The introduction of the study admits that “Mental health effects of gender-affirming surgery thus remain controversial.” In this survey, only 25% of participants had undergone surgery. This study was only a secondary analysis of these survey responses, comparing results of those who did not undergo surgery with those who had.

Reed implies that the 2% fatality rate of the vaginoplasty performed on males who had previously been on puberty blockers is irrelevant because the death “occurred from a wound infection, a potential complication for any surgery.” Hughes acknowledges that the patient died of necrotizing fasciitis, (19) and the case report that Reed links states that the patient, “developed septic shock and multiple organ failure on the basis of an extended-spectrum β-lactamase-producing Escherichia coli. A severe progression of the necrotizing fasciitis was lethal, despite repeated surgical debridement, intravenous antibiotic use, and supportive care at the intensive care unit.” The study that Reed then links to prove this treatment is successful contains extremely graphic images detailing the surgery without any warning. This does not discredit the study, but for that reason I cannot really look at it.

Reed attempts to debunk the accusation that those who took puberty blockers cannot orgasm, by alluding to there being two studies disproving this. However, it appears that Reed linked the same study twice within this quote, "To ensure factual accuracy, studies have shown that those who took puberty blockers are capable of orgasm" Only the abstract is available to me for this study. Because this study is behind a paywall, it is difficult for me to verify Reed’s claims about their results. The study is a survey of group of 31 primary total laparoscopic intestinal vaginoplasty patients, and is a survey about general quality of life one year after the surgery. It states that the group was “relatively young,” and states that the, “median age at time of surgery = 19.1 years, range = 18.3–45.0.” However, it gives no indication of when the patients began transition. It does imply that patients were on "Puberty-suppressing hormonal treatment”, but does not make any mention of when the patients started puberty blockers. Marci Bowers, head of WPATH, has explicitly stated that “I’m unaware of an individual claiming ability to orgasm when they were blocked at Tanner Stage 2.” Tanner Stage 2 is around the age of 11. It is possible these patients began blockers later on, but that evidence is not available to me either way. Another important thing to note is that the conclusion of the second study states, “This group of relatively young transgender women reported satisfactory functional and esthetic results of the neovagina and a good quality of life, despite low Female Sexual Function Index scores.” (bold text mine) “The mean Female Sexual Function Index total score of sexually active transgender women was 26.0 ± 6.8.”

This study is a survey relying on patients to self report their satisfaction, and Hughes does acknowledge the flaws of self reported studies on page 33, stating that measurable studies showed less positive results than surveys. Many of the studies Reed cites as rebuttals rely on self report.

Finally, Reed criticizes the idea that gender dysphoric youth would eventually desist post-puberty. One of the links provided as evidence against this claim leads to another article of Reed's. The criticism of Kenneth Zucker's research from the 90s appears to be that it classifies children with "gender identity disorder" as those who are simply gender non-conforming. The article uses this graphic to illustrate the difference between gender identity disorder and the current DSM-5 diagnosis of gender dysphoria, implying that the latter has stricter requirements.

Reed dismisses any correlation between social transition and desistance rates and accuses Hughes of implying that, “social transition prevents this “natural” desistance, a hypothesis that has not been validated.” While there may have been some flaws in Zunker's original study, this massive difference between then and now certainly raises questions on how the impact of social transition affects a child.

In the next section, Reed claims that the “leaked material” is frequently misrepresented, yet only provides three examples of this occurring. It does appear that Hughes left out the part about the orgasm in the first example, which would have been important context to include (28). In the second example, Reed accuses Hughes of leaving out the fact that it was a detransitioner who used the phrase “gender journey” and not a clinician. In reality, Hughes does not specify who said this, simply stating “There is talk about detransition being just another step in a patient’s “gender journey.” (31) However, we only have the clinicians word to go off to prove that the patient used that phrase, and there is evidence of another clinician pushing patients to identify with their language. This doctor decided to label a patient as “eunuch identified,” despite him not claiming that label himself (51). The third example of a misrepresentation consists of a patient developing a hepatic adenoma (liver mass) after taking testosterone. Reed is correct that hepatic adenomas are benign and that they are linked to both contraceptives and hormones. However, Reed accuses the document of leaving out the fact that the patient was on both oral contraceptives and testosterone. Hughes does in fact state that the patient was on norethindrone acetate, which is a contraceptive. In the WPATH document, the doctor specifically suspects that the hormones are the cause of the liver masses as opposed to the contraceptive.

Reed alleges that Stella O’Malley and Genspect “teased a young trans girl testifying in front of a school board.” The linked tweet reads: “US-UTAH: 11 yr old “Alison” came out as trans at 8 after having a vision of wearing a long white dress in a field. Dad says his “daughter” must be “validated in who she is” & allowed to use girls spaces bc many trans-identified people consider suicide.”

Overall, Reed’s fact checking only provides a few examples, nowhere near the 216 claimed.  Many of the studies linked as rebuttals do not come to the same conclusions as Reed implies. In my opinion, it appears that Reed did not expect the audience of this article to go and read the WPATH files for themselves, or for that matter, even check the links thoroughly. The few good points that are made here do not discredit the entirety of the report, and Reed fails to address the main claims in the report; such as WPATH members admitting that children do not have the capacity to consent, their disregard of proper scientific protocol, the experimental approach to healthcare, disregard of patients' other mental health issues, and lack of ethics.

If anyone wants to add things to this or expand on anything, please feel free to do so. There were a couple sections where my understanding was a bit limited, such as the limitations of the trans youth desistance study, and the puberty blockers/vaginoplasty study.

Edit: Moving this disclaimer down here because a TRA quit reading immediately after they saw this. I would like to acknowledge that I am not a doctor or any type of medical professional (neither is Reed) and some scientific studies may be difficult for me to interpret.

Edit 2: Removed the part about the New Atlantis because I have seen mixed info on it's political leanings.

#wpath #wpath files #transgender #trans #gender critical #erin reed #terfblr #radfem #radical feminism #radical feminists do interact #trans activism

[justinspoliticalcorner]

Erin Reed at Erin In The Morning:

In recent years, anti-transgender activists have used fear of "regret" as justification to ban gender-affirming care for transgender youth and restrict it for many adults. Now, a new systematic review published in The American Journal of Surgery has concluded that the rate of regret for transgender surgeries is "remarkably low." The review encompasses more than 55 individual studies on regret to support its conclusions and will likely be a powerful tool in challenging transgender bans in the coming weeks.

The study, conducted by experts from the University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health, examines reported regret rates for dozens of surgeries as well as major life decisions and compares them to the regret rates for transgender surgeries. It finds that "there is lower regret after [gender-affirming surgery], which is less than 1%, than after many other decisions, both surgical and otherwise." It notes that surgeries such as tubal sterilization, assisted prostatectomy, body contouring, facial rejuvenation, and more all have regret rates more than 10 times as high as gender-affirming surgery. The review also finds that regret rates for gender-affirming surgeries are lower than those for many life decisions. For instance, the survey found that marriage has a regret rate of 31%, having children has a regret rate of 13%, and at least 72% of sexually active students report regret after engaging in sexual activity at least once. All of these are notably magnitudes higher than gender affirming surgery.

Regret is commonly weaponized against transgender care. The recently released Cass Review, currently being used in an attempt to ban transgender care in England, mentions "regret" 20 times in the document. Pamela Paul's story in The New York Times features stories of regret heavily and objects to reports of low regret rates. Legislators use the myth of high levels of regret to justify harsh crackdowns on transgender care. Recently, though, anti-trans activists who have pushed the idea that regret may be high appear to be retreating from their claims. In the WPATH Files, a highly editorialized and error-filled document targeting the World Professional Association for Transgender Health, the authors state that the low levels of regret for transgender people obtaining surgery are actually cause for alarm, and that transgender people are "suspiciously" happy. The idea that transgender people cannot be trusted to report their own happiness and regret has also been echoed by anti-transgender activists and influencers like Matt Walsh and Jesse Singal.

[...] There is no evidence that transgender people experience high rates of regret for any transgender care, including transgender surgery. On the contrary, gender-affirming care saves lives. 

A new systematic review published in The American Journal of Surgery about gender-confirming surgery reveal that its regret rates that are very low, much lower than many other surgeries. This should quash the anti-trans arguments about "regret" that they falsely inflate in which they are used to justify bans on gender-affirming care.

See Also:

MMFA: Right-wing media are using the Cass Report to push for broad restrictions on trans rights, and even violence against the parents of trans youth

#Transgender #Detransition #LGBTQ+ #Studies #Gender Affirming Healthcare #Gender Confirmtion Surgery #The American Journal of Surgery #Cass Review #WPATH Files #Surgery Regret

[gauchereverie]

I hope jk rowling dies forever a painful death involving a car covered in hammer that explodes more than a few times and hammers go flying everywhere

#what the fuck is up with the wpath files i swear to god im going to start screaming #txt

[religion-is-a-mental-illness]

By: Lauren Smith

Published: Mar 8, 2024

Recently leaked files confirm what many gender-critical voices have argued for many years: that so-called gender-affirming care is causing children lifelong harm. New documents expose how the World Professional Association for Transgender Health (WPATH) has routinely put children in harm’s way in the name of trans ideology.

As the global authority on gender medicine, WPATH has shaped the policies of hospitals and governments across the world. Its ‘standards of care’ guidance was treated as the gold standard for dealing with gender-confused youth by NHS England until recently – and it still is by NHS Scotland to this day.

Founded in 1979, WPATH is essentially a trans-activist lobby group masquerading as a scientific organisation. It has long advocated for an ‘affirmation only’ approach to treating children with gender dysphoria – in other words, medicate first, ask questions later, if at all. It has even argued that there should be no age limit on when minors are allowed to transition. In fact, its most recent guidelines recommend that children should have access to irreversible surgical procedures, including double mastectomies and phalloplasties. And this is just what WPATH has been willing to say publicly.

Now, leaked videos, emails and discussions on internal message boards have revealed the true extent of WPATH’s recklessness. These files were released this week by writer and journalist Michael Shellenberger and his nonprofit group, Environmental Progress. They paint a truly horrific picture of the danger that WPATH has exposed children to.

The ‘WPATH Files’ prove that, behind closed doors, doctors, psychologists and other medical professionals associated with WPATH are fully aware that children cannot properly consent to gender-affirming care. In a chilling video from an internal WPATH workshop in 2022, panel members discuss how hard it is to receive informed consent from their young patients – something that would ordinarily be required before any medical procedure. Canadian endocrinologist Dr Daniel Metzger tells the panel that he often has difficulties explaining the effects of puberty blockers and cross-sex hormones to children who ‘hadn’t even had biology in high school yet’.

One thread in the WPATH internal messaging forum reveals that even a developmentally delayed 13-year-old was seen as a suitable candidate for gender-affirming care. A physician assistant and professor at Yale Schools of Medicine discussed in the thread how the child was already on puberty blockers, but wanted to know if it would be ethical to allow them to progress to hormone therapy.

One problem that Metzger and his colleagues routinely face, according to the leaked workshop video, is trying to get young people to grasp that puberty blockers and hormones would likely affect their future fertility. Trying to convince 14-year-olds to preserve their eggs is like ‘talking to a blank wall’, Metzger says, to which the audience responds with nods and knowing smiles.

The WPATH Files also reveal the dire consequences such a blasé attitude to informed consent can have on child patients. Many kids who receive gender-affirming care at a young age grow up to regret the toll it takes on their ability to have biological children. In the leaked video, Metzger refers to a 2022 Dutch study, which found that 27 per cent of young people who underwent early puberty suppression and cross-sex hormones ended up regretting their lack of fertility. At an average age of 32, 44 per cent of biologically female and 35 per cent of biologically male patients say they would choose to preserve their fertility if they could turn back time.

Fertility issues aren’t the only problem facing the young people who get pushed down the path to transitioning. The WPATH Files also go into detail about some of the horrific side effects of hormone therapy and surgery. For females, these include vaginal atrophy (the thinning and inflammation of the vaginal walls), pelvic inflammatory disease (a potentially deadly infection that requires a hysterectomy to treat) and, for males, erections ‘feeling like broken glass’.

WPATH doctors even admit privately that hormone treatment can cause cancer. In one exchange from the internal WPATH forum in 2021, doctors discuss the case of a 16-year-old biologically female patient who developed liver tumours after a lengthy regimen of hormone therapy. Another doctor revealed that a female-to-male trans colleague developed an aggressive type of liver cancer after taking testosterone for about a decade.

For WPATH, potential side effects like liver cancer can’t be allowed to get in the way of a child’s gender transition. ‘At the end of the day’, one doctor is quoted as saying, ‘it is a risk / benefit decision’. Supposedly, if a child does not get the hormones they want, then they will commit suicide.

But this dilemma between ‘suicide or transition’ is not based on any evidence. It is a myth promoted by trans activists. As Mia Hughes notes in her report on the WPATH Files, several studies have found no evidence for a reduction in suicide risk after transition. On the contrary, some have found an elevated risk of suicide post-transition.

But it seems that, as far as WPATH is concerned, once a patient leaves the clinic, he or she is no longer the doctor’s responsibility. As one doctor put it, ‘as long as [the patient is] capable of making that decision of sound mind while informed of the risks, then that may be all you can do’. In other words, these healthcare professionals are attempting to wipe their hands of any responsibility for any negative effects that transitioning might have.

As WPATH president Marci Bowers puts it, ‘patients need to own and take active responsibility for medical decisions, especially those that have potentially permanent effects’. This might be true when adult patients are electing to have risky and non-essential cosmetic surgery. But we are also talking about children here – indeed, vulnerable children, usually with multiple mental-health difficulties – who have been told by medical professionals and other supposed adults that receiving this treatment will ‘fix’ them.

Unfortunately, to anyone who has been paying attention to the trans debate, these revelations may not be that surprising. We have long seen the warning signs that children are being harmed by this dangerous ideology. And worse still, we have seen adults in positions of authority either encouraging this harm, or standing aside and keeping silent.

We saw this in 2022, when Dr Hilary Cass published her damning interim report on the Tavistock Centre, the NHS’s specialist gender-identity clinic for children and young people. The review found that the Tavistock’s approach to treating children was ‘not safe’, and that there were a myriad of potential harms caused by puberty blockers that were not being properly acknowledged by staff. As a result, the Tavistock was ordered to be closed down.

Whistleblowers, media investigations and lawsuits had tried to draw attention to this for years. Yet the Tavistock remained operational, and is still only due to shut its doors this month. Trans ideology has so infected medical institutions that doctors, nurses and therapists feel they have no choice but to transition every child who claims to be born in the wrong body. And they fear that refusing to do so will see them branded as ‘transphobic’. Or, worse still, that not agreeing to prescribe gender-affirming treatment will lead to a child ending their own life.

What the WPATH Files make clear is that those who claim to care most about the plight of ‘trans youth’ are all too often the greatest threats to their safety. They are willing to sacrifice the health of deeply vulnerable children to the cult of gender affirmation. The treatments they tout as ‘life-saving’ and ‘life-affirming’ can actually be ‘life-ruining’. Gruesome side effects from cancer to infertility are dismissed as necessary evils on the path to transitioning. This is the opposite of compassionate.

It is time to bring an end to this dangerous medical experiment.

#Lauren Smith #medical scandal #medical corruption #medical malpractice #medical experimentation #The WPATH Files #WPATH Files #World Professional Association for Transgender Health #gender ideology #intersectional feminism #gender identity ideology #queer theory #gender lobotomy #gender affirming care #gender affirming healthcare #gender affirmation #affirmation model #religion is a mental illness

[thearbourist]

The WPATH Files - The Beginning of the End of the Farce of 'Gender Affirming Care'.

Transgender ideology is based on lies and emotional coercion.  Very effective lies and coercion mind you – enough to make doctors forget about the “do no harm” part of their medical training and instead take up gender-woo and non evidence based medical practices. So here it is – the beginning of the unraveling, and more importantly the beginning of the lawsuits for medical malpractice.  The…

View On WordPress

#FAFO #Ideological Capture of Institutions #Medical Capture #The WPATH files #Tipping Points #Transgender Lies

[thequietabsolute]

Putting this here for future reference …

#cass report #wpath files #judith butler #cass review #n.

[aridara]

So you know about the "WPATH Files", that collection of screenshotted posts taken from the WPATH forum, which supposedly expose how WPATH doctors are evil and out to get your children? You'd be surprised about how the claims anti-trans activists make about those posts are not supported by the posts themselves. Don't believe me? Then let's look at the NY Post article about the document. Specifically, let's look at what the article claims versus the actual reality of what is shown in those posts.

TL;dr:

WPATH doesn't authorize medical transition procedures for immature patient. They actually verify that the patient is mature enough, before allowing the procedure. They also need parental consent.

WPATH doesn't ignore the risks of gender-affirming care. They explain them to both patient and parents, in detail. And if issues do show up, they try to fix them instead of sweeping them under the rug.

WPATH isn't trying to "desex (sterilize) children". That's just the same, old, tired "they're coming for your children!" narrative used against Jewish people, gay people etc etc.

WPATH doesn't disbelieve detransitioners, they support them.

CLAIM: Not surprisingly, age comes up frequently in the WPATH files, from concerns about whether a developmentally delayed 13-year-old can start on puberty blockers to whether the growth of a 10-year-old girl will be stunted by hormones. (The article implies that WPATH doctors are pushing medical procedures on patients who are too young to understand them)

REALITY: The first case (section 21-A "ETHICAL GUIDELINES TO ADOLESCENT CARE - WPATH members discuss the Standards of Care (SOC) ethics for treating adevelopmentally delayed, 13-year-old") is about a 13yo who is already on puberty blockers. Specifically, patients who want hormone therapy need to reach enough emotional/cognitive maturity to provide informed consent to the treatment; but the specific patient in question will reach that maturity either way later than normal, or never at all. The poster asks what to do. Other users suggest a psychiatric evaluation to check whether the patient is capable of consenting or not, weighing the risks of continuing the blockers with the risks of stopping them, etc.

There is no evidence that the doctors gave hormones to that 13yo. Keep in mind that the NYP was complaining about the possibility of that 13yo getting hormones. The NYP had no complaint about the usage of puberty blockers, since the patient was effectively mature enough to get those, and the parents and doctors gave authorization.

Also, one of the posters point out that this kind of discussion also happens with cis (aka non-trans) kids with mental development issues who need access to surgeries. The normal approach is for the doctor, the parents and the patient to discuss together to reach a consensus: in order to approve the medical procedure, the doctor must believe that the procedure will be medically beneficial, the parents must provide full informed consent, and the patient must provide as much consent as possible. There are limit cases where one side can be overridden, like when a patient will never reach a sufficient level of mental maturity, and the doctor and parents are forced to evaluate the risk/benefits of each option. My point is that the NYP has no problems when this approach is applied to cis kids; it complains only when trans kids might get access to medical procedures.

The second case (section 5-A "PUBERTY SUPPRESSION TACTICS - A WPATH member questions the effects of puberty blockers on total height achievement for a 10-year-old patient") is about a patient who asked questions about puberty blockers. The 10yo patient in question was NOT on puberty blockers, nor he was given any - unlike what the NYP tries to imply.

CLAIM: During one conversation, a member asked for advice about a 14-year-old patient, a boy who identified as a girl and had begun transitioning at 4. The child insisted on a vaginoplasty...

REALITY: This is false. The original poster (section 1-A "GENDER AFFIRMING SURGERY FOR MINORS - WPATH members discuss transition surgery for a 14-year-old") only talks about "Gender Affirming Surgery MtF". Christine N. McGinn talks about vaginoplasties she performed on minors, noting that they didn't have any more issues than adult patients: most of them went fantastic, a few of them got issue (mostly because they didn't follow the dilation schedule), and none of them regretted the surgery.

It should also be mentioned that multiple users agreed that 14 was too young. Which shoots a hole in the NYP's "WPATH tried to push vaginoplasty on a 14yo kid" narrative. Whoops.

CLAIM: President Bowers, for instance, said publicly in 2022 that puberty blockers are “completely reversible,” although in the internal forum she conceded it is “in its infancy.”

REALITY: The two quotes don't contradict each other. In the first quote, Bowers claims that blockers AS THEY ARE USED IN GENDER-AFFIRMING CARE (aka for maximum 1 year) are reversible - meaning that if you stop taking them, the effects should reverse themselves. But the second quote (in section 5-B "PUBERTY SUPPRESSION TACTICS - WPATH members discuss how puberty blockers preclude fertility options for trans patients") talks about what happens when puberty is blocked indefinitely. Two very different things.

CLAIM: What about children who are infertile for life since they started hormone blockers before they reached puberty? Bowers told her colleagues the “fertility question has no research.”

REALITY: The Bowers quote doesn't exist in any of the screenshotted posts. The NYP made that up.

CLAIM: At other stages, members talk frankly about the complications for the transition surgery for girls, a phalloplasty in which a nonfunctioning pseudo-penis is fashioned from either forearm or thigh tissue. It requires a full hysterectomy and surgical removal of the vagina. They also discuss other serious consequences, including pelvic inflammatory disease, vaginal atrophy, abnormal pap tests and incontinence.

REALITY: I can't find the screenshotted posts in question. But let's assume for a second that the NYP is telling the truth here; it doesn't actually explain why "WPATH doctors discuss the complications for transition surgery" is bad. As usual, anti-trans activists only focus on the negative effects and risks of any form of medical transition, while completely ignoring any possible positive effect - like, say, alleviating the patient's gender dysphoria.

As far as I can tell, the NYP is trying to imply that these doctors hide these risks from their patients. Which... isn't true. Like, at all. In fact, the fact that they talk about the negative effects so much on a web forum that anyone can access just by paying a fee should clue the reader that these doctors are NOT trying to hide these effects/risks from their patients.

CLAIM: A 16-year-old girl who had been on puberty blockers for several years before she was put on testosterone for a year had developed two liver tumors that an oncologist concluded the hormones had caused.

REALITY: Looking at the posts (section 3-B "SURGICAL OR HEALTHCARE COMPLICATIONS - A WPATH member discusses the development of hepatic adenomas on a client taking testosterone/estrogen"), it turns out that the patient was using both testosterone and oral contraceptives. Hepatic adenomas, also called hepatocellular adenomas, are rare but benign epithelial tumors of the liver frequently associated with oral contraceptive pill use. Meanwhile, there is no evidence that transmasculine people who use hormones are at risk of liver cancer. (Sources: 1, 2.)

CLAIM: Another member described “a young patient on testosterone for 3 years” who had developed “vaginal/pelvic pain/spotting . . . [and] atrophy with the persistent yellow discharge.” Several colleagues described patients with similar conditions, some with debilitating bowel problems or bleeding and excruciating pain during sex (“feeling like broken glass”). Vaginal estrogen creams and moisturizers as well as hyaluronic acid suppositories “can be helpful.” One WPATH member seemed surprised: “The transgender people under my surveillance do not complain about this matter. However, I confess that I have never asked them about it.”

REALITY: This part of the NYP article repeatedly jumps between section 3-C "SURGICAL OR HEALTHCARE COMPLICATIONS - A WPATH member reports their young patient is experiencing vaginal pain on testosterone"; and section 3-D "SURGICAL OR HEALTHCARE COMPLICATIONS - WPATH members discuss erection pain in a patient on estrogen". So there's some confusion here. The general gist of both discussions is: the original poster brings up an issue that their patient has, other users discuss similar cases, provide additional information, and offer possible solutions.

Again: this is a case where a patient got some negative side effects from the treatment, and doctors are trying to solve them. Cases like these happen all the time. There is no evidence that the patient wasn't properly informed before being allowed to get the treatment. The doctors are trying to fix the problem. So what, exactly, is the NYP complaining about? Because if ONE single case of negative effects is enough to condemn a medical treatment, then the NYP should condemn every single medical treatment ever. But no, instead they only focus the blame on treatments that are primarily used by trans people. I wonder why [#sarcasm].

CLAIM: “How do we come up with appropriate standards for non-binary patients?” asked Thomas Satterwhite, a San Francisco-based plastic surgeon who has operated on dozens of patients younger than 18 since 2014. “I’ve found more and more patients recently requesting ‘non-standard’ procedures.” What are nonstandard procedures? They include “non-binary top surgery,” a mastectomy without nipples. There are brutal procedures for girls that eliminate all or part of the vagina and for boys that amputate the penis, scrotum and testicles.

REALITY: Satterwhite did, in fact, ask information about standards for non-binary patients (section 12-A "NON-STANDARD MEDICAL PROCEDURES - WPATH members discuss appropriate standards of care for nonbinary patients, particularly when they request non-standard procedures"). However, you can notice a thing. The NYP made sure to explicitly talk about "de-gendering" surgeries in the most scary and shocking way possible; then they mentioned that Satterwhite operated on dozens of patients younger than 18; then mentioned his quote about non-standard surgeries; and then proceeded to once again describe said surgeries in scary terms, saying that they're performed on "girls" and "boys". So you would think that Satterwhite is performing these horrible surgeries on children, right?

Well, turns out that in the screenshotted posts, Satterwhite made absolutely no mention of underage patients. His question was about non-binary patients in general.

Also, fun fact that the NYP doesn't mention: in trans healthcare, practically all genital surgeries are performed on adult patients. The very few exceptions are performed on 17yo patients, but ONLY in cases where waiting until the patient becomes 18 would make the surgery significantly harder to perform, to the point of having an increased risk of killing the patient. And even then, you need a metric ton of medical requirements.

CLAIM: A particularly intense subject of discussion was whether minors could understand the lifelong consequences of their gender treatments. Minors are presumed by law to be incapable of making an informed decision about having a vasectomy or tubal ligation. Gender surgeries are an exception, however. WPATH’s Standard of Care allows all procedures so long as the minor “demonstrates the emotional and cognitive maturity required to provide informed consent/assent for the treatment.”

REALITY: The NYP is lying. For starters, it forgets to mention that, in various states, minors CAN get certain surgical procedures as long as they pass certain prerequisites, such as a minimum age (like 16). Why? Because it's acknowledged that children mature over time, and become more and more capable of understanding - and by extension consenting to - more complex things, like surgeries.

Another thing that the NYP omits is that minors can get invasive medical treatments even if they don't reach the minimum consent age, as long as the doctor can provide reasonable medical reason to do so; the parents provide fully informed consent to the procedure; and the underage patient provides a sufficient amount of consent, which varies depending on the procedure requested. The latter is what “demonstrates the emotional and cognitive maturity required to provide informed consent/assent for the treatment” refers to.

The main difference is that WPATH doesn't decide that patients above a certain age are automatically mature enough to consent to a specific procedure; instead, WPATH doctors actually verify whether or not the patient is mature enough to consent to that specific procedure.

CLAIM: In a May 2022 internal workshop, “Identity Evolution,” WPATH members conceded that was all but impossible. Daniel Metzger, the British Columbia endocrinologist who cowrote the Canadian Pediatric Society’s position paper on health care for trans minors, said, “I think the thing you have to remember about kids is that we’re often explaining these sorts of things to people who haven’t even had biology in high school yet.”

The quote is from the transcript of the "Identity Evolution Workshop", Clip 1. It also completely fails to prove the NYP's point. Remember: the NYP is trying to claim that children cannot, under any circumstance, consent to surgeries - implying that this means that they shouldn't have access to surgeries. This is false.

Also, the transcript shows Metzger saying that they should improve the way doctors explain medical procedures to patients and parents, because if they don't understand these procedures, they can't provide informed consent, and therefore they can't have access to said procedures. Metzger is NOT proposing to provide medical procedures to people who don't provide informed consent.

CLAIM: Although many WPATH members privately doubt that adolescents can give truly informed consent to life-altering procedures, they must affirm whatever children say about their gender.Unless, the WPATH files disclose, the patient wants to reverse course and become a so-called detransitioner.WPATH members mostly dismiss those cases as insignificant or overblown by the media and question whether minors who want to revert to their birth sex really understand what they are doing.It’s a question that would never be asked for minors who declared themselves to be gender dysphoric. One case involved a 17-year-old boy, just graduated from high school, who had been on testosterone for two years. He was reported to be “very distraught and angry. He reports he feels he was brainwashed and is upset by the permanent changes to his body.”A self-described “queer therapist” did not believe any young person could be brainwashed. “In my experience, those stories come from people who have an active agenda against the rights of trans people.”

REALITY: The NYP is dishonestly mixing together multiple different contexts.

When a patient goes to a WPATH doctor and claims to be trans, the doctor accepts it. When a patient claims to not be trans anymore, the doctor still accepts it.

When a patient declares themselves to be gender dysphoric, the doctor DOES, in fact, verify whether the assertion is true, through psychological examination, exploring whether the dysphoria is innate or caused by issues like mistakenly believing that being feminine means that you must be a girl and therefore have "female" biology and so on. After that is verified, however, the doctor accepts that the patient is right.

When discussing how the media and public claim that there is an epidemic of detransitioners, THAT is when WPATH doctors will say that the issue is overblown. Because the reality is that the amount of detransitioners - and specifically people who got through medical transition and then detransitioned afterwards - is incredibly small, unlike what anti-trans activists would make you believe.

All of that can be clearly seen in the discussion in section 4-A "DETRANSITION CONCERNS - A WPATH member reports a patient who reports feeling “brainwashed” into transition".

SO, TO RECAP:

The NYP complains that the WPATH uses ‘arbitrary’ age limits, implying imply that WPATH is trying to pressure forcibly trans young kids before they were ready. The reality, however, is that WPATH is doing what every other medical field does when a patient is a minor: they approve the treatment only if the doctor reasonably believes that it will be overall beneficial, the parents give informed consent, and the patient itself gives consent as much as possible. Checking whether or not a kid is mentally mature enough to at least understand somewhat the procedure falls under the third point; checking the kid's physical maturity falls under the first point, because it impacts whether or not the therapy will be overall beneficial.

(BTW, the NYP says that, when making the new Standards of Care, WPATH "scrapped a draft chapter about ethics and removed minimum-age requirements for children starting puberty blockers or undergoing sexual-modification surgeries." What the NYP doesn't say is that the guidelines ARE the ethics of the practice; and that WPATH replaced minimum-age requirements with evidence-based requirements. For example: instead of assuming that all 16yo patients are automatically mature enough to get hormones, the new guidelines require doctors to actually verify whether the patient is mature enough (both physically and mentally) or not. Why this change? Because there were several cases where 16yo-or-older patients were allowed to get hormones when they weren't ready.)

The NYP claims that WPATH doctors downplayed the dangers of gender-affirming care. They did not. The post themselves demonstrate that they amply and truthfully discuss these dangers - and inform their patients about them. And when negative issues do show up, WPATH doctors try to fix them.

The NYP implies that WPATH doctors are trying to de-sex children. They did not. The posts only talk about performing non-standard procedures on non-binary patients - but they make absolutely no mention of minors.

The NYP claims that WPATH doctors are dismissing and disbelieving detransitioners. They did not. WPATH doctors support detransitioning patients, direct them towards support groups, research solutions for the physical issues caused by the regretted procedures, and so on and so forth. WPATH doctors also denounce the whole "there's an epidemic of people who go through medical transition and then later detransition and regret it, because it's way too easy for children to get brainwashed into being trans and to get medical transition" narrative as false because it IS false.

#trans #wpath #wpath files

[t-news-pastille]

Actu trans de mars 2024

On débute les infos françaises pour faire suite à une news du mois dernier. La Haute Autorité de Santé (la HAS) conteste la décision du Tribunal administratif de Montreuil qui lui demandait de divulguer les noms des membres de son groupe de travail sur les parcours de transition des personnes trans.

La HAS a saisi la Cour de cassation pour continuer sa pratique habituelle de protection de la confidentialité de ses experts et expertes, soulignant les risques de pressions et les implications pour leur vie privée.

Ce groupe, formé en avril 2023, comprend des professionnel·les de santé, des expert·es et des représentant·es d'associations, et vise à améliorer l'organisation des soins et la prise en charge médicale des personnes trans.

Un regroupement d'associations LGBTQ+, dont STOP homophobie et Acceptess-T, ainsi qu’11 personnes trans et non-binaires, ont saisi le Conseil d'État pour revendiquer le droit à définir librement leur identité de genre et demander l'annulation des circulaires de 2017 concernant les procédures de changement de prénom et de mention du sexe à l'état civil.

(Ces 2 circulaires ont été mises en place pour préciser certains points de la loi du 18 novembre 2016 qui est relative au changement d’état-civil.)

Ces actions contestent notamment l'obligation implicite de cispassing, perçue comme une atteinte au droit au respect de la vie privée, et une discrimination basée sur l'apparence physique, excluant notamment les personnes non-binaires.

Le recours vise à promouvoir l'autodétermination du genre et à mettre fin à l'intervention de l'État dans la reconnaissance des identités de genre.

J’en profite au passage, vu qu’on est sur la même thématique, pour vous informer que l’association TOUTES DES FEMMES a sorti une pétition visant à demander un changement de sexe à l’état-civil libre, déjudiciarisé et gratuit.

Un rapport de 369 pages sur « la transidentification [sic] des mineurs » a été remis au Sénat à la fin du mois par un groupe de travail de sénateurs LR, dans le but d’en dégager des propositions de loi avant l’été.

Je ne vais pas trop m’étendre en détail sur le rapport parce que j’ai déjà fais plusieurs stories Instagram et que je prévoie de dédier une vidéo sur le sujet.

Mais pour contextualiser rapidement, Jacqueline Eustache Brinio est à la tête de ce groupe LR. Elle a voté contre l’interdiction des thérapies de conversion contre les personnes trans et les transitions pour les mineur·es trans en 2022. (Mais elle est favorable aux mutilations sur les enfants intersexes…)

Le groupe de travail est proche de personnalités douteuses comme Céline Masson et Caroline Eliacheff qui sont toutes deux à la tête ou proches de mouvements sectaires comme L’observatoire de la petite sirène et Ypomonie. (Qui d’ailleurs, pour ce premier, a partagé sur son site le rapport avant que celui-ci ne soit rendu public par les LR. Ce qui rend assez clair le fait que les LR ont servis de pantins pour diffuser politiquement une idéologie transphobe.)

Il semble évident, au vu du nom du rapport et des gens interrogés, qu’il y a une volonté explicite à terme d’interdire les transitions des mineur·es ainsi que toute reconnaissance de l’identité de genre des mineur·es. Et d’emboîter le pas, ou de retranscrire « à la française », ce qui peut se faire depuis quelques années au Royaume-Uni et aux États-Unis. (En plus de propager de la désinformation. Le lendemain, on a d’ailleurs eu le droit à Ségolène Royal qui nous sortait que la transidentité des gens venait du glyphosate… Voilà, voilà.)

Qu’on s’entende bien, là ça commence par les mineur·es parce que ce sont les « cibles » les plus faciles à atteindre sous couvert de protection des enfants. Mais après ce sera pas avant 25 ans. Pour ensuite terminer sur une tentative d’interdiction complète des transitions. Quand bien même toutes les recommandations mondiales sérieuses recommandent ces transitions…

Ce n’est pas la première fois que ça arrive mais, Brigitte Macron, épouse d’Emmanuel Macron, a été de nouveau victime de rumeurs et théories complotistes affirmant qu’elle serait une femme trans. Selon certain·es internautes, un vaste complot serait à l'œuvre pour masquer ce changement d'état-civil et sa soit disant « véritable identité ». Littéralement on a pu entendre ce genre de chose concernant Macron : « [Macron] qui n’a autre chose à faire que de prétendre au déclenchement d'une troisième guerre mondiale pour cacher des rumeurs sur la transsexualité de sa femme »

Au lieu d’attaquer Macron sur son incompétence. J’veux dire, littéralement, on se trouve dans une kakistocratie depuis que le mec au pouvoir. Rien ne va. Tous nos acquis s’effondrent les uns après les autres. Les français·es ont la tête sous l’eau. Mais non, les gens préfèrent gaspiller leur énergie sur un truc dont on se fout éperdument.

C’est la première fois que le président s’est exprimé là-dessus. On aurait pu avoir une sorte de Gaga Moment, à dire qu’on s’en fiche complètement et que ce n’est pas une tare, ni une insulte d’être trans. Mais sans surprise, il a appelé à un renforcement de « l’ordre public numérique » sur les réseaux sociaux qu’il a qualifié de « lieu d’expression des plus fous ». Et a dénoncé de « fausses informations » et des « scénarios fabriqués » concernant son épouse. En ajoutant que « le pire, [était] que les gens finissent par y croire, et cela [...] énerve jusque dans [sa] vie privée ».

Une bonne nouvelle qui intéressera j’imagine pas mal de personnes transmasculines hormonées : l’arrivée sur le marché français d’un générique du Nébido est prévue ! (Pour rappel, le Nébido c’est un type de THS masculinisant qui se prends par injection toutes les 10 à 14 semaines environs.) TESTOSTERONE BESINS, c’est le nom du générique – il y a aussi le nom Androject qui se balade pour la France -, a reçu un avis favorable au remboursement de la HAS.

L’association ACCEPTESS-T a eu l’occasion de discuter avec le labo Besins qui le produit et confirme qu’un accord de prix labo / sécu a bien été passé. (Au passage – parce qu’on m’a demandé en message privé si ça allait être un médoc safe - Besins c’est aussi le labo qui produit l’Androgel et l’Andractim. Et ils sont spécialisés dans les médoc’ gynéco et andrologiques. Sachant qu’en plus, il y a des tests et réglementations avant qu’un produit arrive en France. Il y a pas vraiment de raison qu’on se retrouve avec un générique dangereux. Parenthèse refermée.)

Concernant le remboursement, on serait sur du 65%. Et en théorie comme pour les autres THS, c’est sensé n’être valable que pour du AMM. (C’est à dire que l’utilisation qu’aura le patient du traitement a été bien listée dans l’autorisation de mise sur le marché du médicament.) Pour les personnes trans, on est, sur le papier en tout cas, sur du Hors AMM pour tous les THS. Donc c’est sensé bloquer pour le remboursement. Après dans les faits, les médecins n’inscrivent pas (ou en tout cas très rarement) ce « Hors AMM » sur les ordonnances. Donc si ce n’est pas inscrit, le remboursement est sensé se faire.

Au moment où j’enregistre cet épisode, on ne sait pas encore exactement quand ce générique sera disponible. Selon Maud Royer qui a confirmé l’info sur Twitter, il ne serait question que de quelques semaines (en tout cas la formulation de son tweet va dans ce sens). Après, des professionnel·les de santé sont plutôt d’avis que ça n’arriverait pas avant minimum plusieurs mois à 1 an ou plus. Mon endocrinologue et ma pharmacienne n’avaient pas d’infos lorsque je leur ai posé des questions là-dessus. Donc il va falloir se montrer patient avant d’avoir des infos plus officielles.

Pour faire suite à une news du mois dernier concernant l’attaque au couteau d'une jeune fille trans lors d’une fête d’anniversaire à Londres, 3 ado supplémentaires ont été inculpé·es et un procès est prévu pour le 6 janvier 2025.

L’enquêtrice principale sur cette affaire a indiqué qu’« à ce stade, [la police traite] cela comme un crime de haine transphobe ».

Il y a quelques semaines, JK Rowling a posté un tweet transphobe visant India Willoughby, une journaliste trans britannique. Suite à cette controverse, Willoughby a rencontré la police pour discuter de cette situation, où elle était qualifiée d’« homme » se déguisant en femme.

Bien que la police ait compris la situation et reconnu le caractère haineux du tweet, les lois actuelles au Royaume-Uni ne permettent pas de le qualifier comme un crime de haine, nécessitant plusieurs critères spécifiques.

Cependant, le tweet de Rowling a été enregistré par la police britannique en tant qu'« incident de haine non criminel », permettant ainsi de documenter cette manifestation de haine, de signaler les tendances discriminatoires et d'inscrire officiellement la transphobie de Rowling dans le registre public. Une première il me semble, malgré ses antécédents de comportements transphobes.

Toujours concernant JK Rowling, décidément la nénette passe ses journées à être obsédée sur les personnes trans…., cette dernière nous a pondu un tweet négationniste concernant l'Holocauste, affirmant que les personnes trans n’étaient pas ciblées par les nazi·es.

Ce qui bien évidemment est faux hein.

Je ne vais pas m’étendre sur le sujet parce que ça mériterait une vidéo dédiée, mais l'Institut des sciences sexuelles de Magnus Hirschfeld (qui est considéré un peu comme un pionnier dans la recherche pour les transitions et l’accompagnement des personnes trans) a été attaqué et ravagé en mai 1933. Les livres qui composaient la bibliothèque de cet institut, estimés de 10 000 à 20 000 ouvrages tout de même (qui portaient notamment sur les soins de santé queer, l’homosexualité, l’intersexuation et la transidentité, y compris sur des recherches scientifiques liées aux procédures de transition) ont été utilisés dans le cadre des premières autodafés nazis. Il était question de censure de l’esprit contraire aux valeurs, aux traditions ou à l'identité allemande.

Il convient également de souligner que Dora Richter, la première femme trans au monde à bénéficier d’une opération de réassignation sexuelle, a probablement été assassinée lors de ce raid ou peu de temps après.

Donc voilà, à un moment donné tu ne peux pas refaire l’Histoire juste parce que t’es transphobe. Ce n’est pas possible !

La dernière personne qui s’y est tentée s’était d’ailleurs retrouvée au tribunal à Cologne et avait perdu.

J’en avais déjà parlé il y a quelques mois, c’est officiellement pérenne, le NHS d’Angleterre ne prescrira plus de bloqueurs de puberté aux mineur·es trans. Pour y avoir accès il faudra faire parti·e d’un essai clinique ou bien se diriger vers des médecins privés.

Le Conseil National suisse a rejeté la proposition d'interdire les thérapies de conversion au niveau national. (Thérapies de conversion qui, je le rappelle, sont des tortures visant à rendre les personnes LGBTQ+ cis et hétéro).

Cette décision ne remet pas en cause l'interdiction de telles pratiques émise par le canton de Neuchâtel au printemps 2023. Les interdictions sont bien maintenues à l'échelle locale.

Le parti au pouvoir en Géorgie a proposé un projet de loi visant à lutter contre une « propagande LGBTQ+ » et qui restreindrait sévèrement les droits des personnes queers. Ce texte comporte une longue liste de mesures homophobes et transphobes, comprenant notamment une interdiction de changement de la mention du sexe.

Environ 200 personnes ont attaqué un couple de personnes trans dans le centre de Thessalonique, en Grèce.

Les victimes, âgées de 21 ans, ont été harcelées verbalement puis agressées physiquement avec des bouteilles et d'autres objets. Elles ont trouvé refuge dans un restaurant voisin, où le harcèlement a continué.

Cette attaque choquante a déclenché une vague d'indignation, avec des milliers de personnes descendant dans les rues de la ville pour manifester leur soutien aux victimes.

La réponse de la police a été critiquée pour son intervention tardive malgré la proximité d'un commissariat.

Les autorités ont depuis arrêté 21 personnes, dont 11 mineur·es, en lien avec l'attaque. Le plus jeune ayant seulement 14 ans.

Après que la Cour suprême russe ait banni je cite le « mouvement international LGBTQ+ » en fin d’année 2023, la Russie a désormais placé ce mouvement sur sa liste de personnes ou associations déclarées comme étant « terroristes et extrémistes ».

Cette liste est tenue à jour par une agence appelée Rosfinmonitoring, qui a le pouvoir de geler les comptes bancaires de plus de 14 000 personnes et entités désignées comme extrémistes et terroristes. (Cette liste ratisse assez large puisque cela va d’Al-Qaïda, à la société Meta, en passant par les associé·es de l’ex-chef de l’opposition russe Alexei Navalny).

Le président du Salvador, Nayib Bukele, a interdit et fait retirer officiellement tous les matériels pédagogiques concernant « l'idéologie du genre » dans toutes les écoles publiques du pays.

Tout responsable scolaire qui violerait la directive du ministère fera face à des conséquences juridiques, selon le ministre de l’Éducation.

Une étude récente, impliquant 552 jeunes, publiée dans la revue médicale Jama Pediatrics a révélé que seulement 1% des moins de 18 ans référé·es à un service de genre pour jeunes en Australie entre 2014 et 2020 ont choisi de faire marche arrière après avoir commencé à recevoir un traitement de type hormones ou bloqueurs de puberté. Ce qui signifie que 99% d’entre elleux n’ont pas changé d’avis.

La communauté trans de Karachi au Pakistan a organisé une manifestation devant le Karachi Press Club en réponse à une récente attaque de foule contre des femmes trans courant mars.

Les militant·es trans ont exprimé leurs préoccupations concernant le manque de droits fondamentaux et de respect, soulignant la vulnérabilité de leur communauté et l'absence de soutien du gouvernement. Iels ont demandé une action concrète et ont averti qu'en l'absence de progrès, iels bloqueraient les routes principales de Karachi.

La star néerlandaise de fléchettes, Noa-Lyn van Leuven, a fait face à une controverse après avoir remporté des titres historiques contre des hommes et des femmes au cours de la même semaine.

Elle a d'abord remporté le tournoi mixte PDC Challenge Tour en Allemagne, devenant la première femme à remporter un événement de cette série. Elle a ensuite remporté un tournoi féminin au Royaume-Uni, battant 2 joueuses vétérans bien classées, dont la numéro un actuelle.

Des critiques s’en sont suivies contre sa participation et ses victoires, certaines personnes affirmant qu'elle avait un avantage biologique au jeu des fléchettes. (Parce qu’effectivement c’est bien connu que les femmes trans ont un avantage indéniable pour viser une cible… Tout le monde sait ça !)

Et 2 joueuses ont quitté la sélection néerlandaise, car elles refusent de jouer avec une coéquipière trans. La Fédération néerlandaise de fléchettes a indiqué regretter cette décision, mais maintient son soutien à Van Leuven qui « répond à toutes les exigences » lui permettant de jouer dans la catégorie féminine.

J’étais passé complètement à côté de cette histoire, mais Patrick Beja du podcast Le RDV Jeux, ainsi que ses invité·es, en particulier le journaliste Cassim Montilla, ont abordé le sujet en appuyant sur le caractère transphobe de l’affaire donc j’me suis dis que j’allai en parler brièvement.

On est un peu face au Gamergate 2.0.

Sweet Baby Inc, une petite entreprise canadienne de consulting en narration dans le jeu-vidéo, est accusée de « wokiser » (alors je ne sais pas si le terme existe mais passons...) les grosses productions jv comme God of War Ragnarok, Alan Wake 2 ou encore Spiderman (qui sont pourtant 3 jeux où vous jouez un personnage principal blanc cishet masuclin – ‘fin truc habituel hein).

D’après des internautes, plutôt orienté·es droite et extrême-droite MAGA – donc trumpist hein -, l’entreprise aurait obligé les dev à intégrer plus d’inclusivité dans leurs jeux. (Ce qui n’est pas le cas au passage, lorsqu’il y a consulting et relecture, ce sont les boites de dev qui en font la demande explicite pour améliorer la narration et création de leurs jeux.)

Ces personnes présentent aussi l’entreprise comme étant un « cancer idéologique qui ruine les jeux-vidéo » et qui serait anti-homme cis blanc, à forcer à mettre des personnages trans partout.

Tout ça a résulté à plusieurs choses :

Une vague de harcèlement à l’encontre de l’entreprise et ses employé·es ;

La création d’un groupe Steam (Pour les gens qui ne le sauraient pas, Steam est une plateforme de distribution numérique de jeux vidéo sur PC) – qui liste tous les jeux auxquels la boite aurait fait de la relecture pour appeler à les boycotter. - Dans la réalité, le travail effectué ne comprends pas toujours de la relecture inclusive selon les jeux. -

Et surtout d’un serveur Discord où de nombreux messages et images à caractère transphobe, raciste et/ou misogyne pullulent allègrement. C’est la foire à la saucisse ! Et c’est tel, que les membres sont même appelé·es à utiliser Telegram, qui est une application de messagerie offrant la possibilité de communiquer de manière privée avec des messages chiffrés de bout en bout pour contrôler la confidentialité des discussions, lorsqu’on est sur des discours qui dépassent un seuil de violence (on va dire ça comme ça) qui ferait sauter le serveur Discord.

On termine avec les États-Unis. Côté législation ce mois-ci nous avons :

- Une cour d’appel fédérale qui a autorisé l’entrée en vigueur immédiate de l’interdiction des soins d’affirmation de genre dans l’Indiana.

- Le Wyoming qui est devenu le dernier État américain en date à interdire les soins d'affirmation de genre pour les mineur·es trans, rejoignant 23 autres États du pays qui ont adopté des lois restreignant ou interdisant ces types de soins.

- La législature du Kansas qui vient d'adopter un projet de loi qui exigera 2 choses :

La suppression de tous comptes de réseaux sociaux appartenant aux personnes de 14 ans et moins.

Et une vérification de l'âge pour accéder à tout site qui « publie ou distribue du matériel préjudiciable aux mineur·es ».

A première vue, on peut se dire « Bon, pourquoi pas. Ça évitera que les gamin·es tombent sur des sites pour adultes ». Alors, oui. Mais pas que !

Dans les faits, la formulation de la loi fait que ça va aussi s’appliquer pour tout sites ayant un contenu LGBTQ+ ou bien orientés éducation à la vie affective et sexuelle.

Lorsqu’on parle de vérification d’âge, ce ne sera pas juste cliquer sur un bouton pop up disant « j’atteste que j’ai bien 18 ans » hein. On parle ici de fournir une carte d’identité ou bien une carte bancaire. Quelque chose qui, factuellement, prouve que vous êtes bien majeur·e. Il n’y a peu de marche de manœuvre pour tenter de contourner la chose.

Ce qui pose, bien évidemment problème lorsqu’on est en questionnement et en recherche de réponses ou de représentation à ces âges là. Et qu’on ne peut pas ou ne se sent pas à l’aise avec le fait de questionner ses proches sur ces sujets.

Sans parler du fait que ça s’appliquera pour toutes les personnes du Kansas qui utilisent ces plateformes. On sera sur du stockage de masse de documents perso.

- Alors je sais que ces derniers mois j’ai dis que je ne traiterai plus des propositions de loi négatives mais celle-ci est suffisamment fucked up pour la mentionner : Un nouveau projet de loi dans le Missouri inscrirait les profs sur le registre des infractions sexuelles s'iels « soutiennent et/ou contribuent à la transition sociale » d'un ou une jeune trans. (Que ce soit l’usage des bons pronoms, un soutien matériel, du partage d’infos ou de ressources concernant les transitions sociales).

Ce serait catégorisé comme un délit de classe E, passible de peine pouvant aller jusqu'à 4 ans de prison et d’amendes pouvant atteindre 10 000 dollars.

Selon le Los Angeles Blade, il est prévu que ce projet de loi n'aboutisse pas en commission, mais tout de même, cela reste inquiétant…

- Un projet de loi interdisant les drapeaux queer et les discussions concernant les personnes LGBTQ+ dans les écoles de l'Utah a été rejeté par la Chambre des représentants de cet État.

- Un projet de loi visant à forcer les prof à mégenrer les élèves trans et à leur interdire d'utiliser les bonnes toilettes à l'école a été rejeté en Arizona.

- Et pour terminer avec cette partie législation : Le conseil municipal de Sacramento, capitale de la Californie, a voté à l'unanimité pour déclarer la ville comme "sanctuaire pour les personnes trans", garantissant que ses ressources municipales ne seront pas utilisées pour criminaliser les personnes trans en quête de soins d’affirmation de genre, et ne coopéreront pas avec celleux qui cherchent à faire respecter des lois criminalisant ces soins dans d'autres États.

Dans le reste de l’actu USA :

- Des républicain·es de l'Alabama demandent le licenciement d'une employée trans du Space Camp de la NASA après qu'un homme ait signalé sur Facebook la présence de cette employée, sans qu'aucune allégation d'un comportement inapproprié ne soit faite. L’affaire à pris de l’ampleur après que le compte Libs of Tiktok – encore lui… - aie emboîté le pas pour en parler.

Des politiciens, dont le sénateur Tommy Tuberville, ont insinué que la simple présence d'une personne trans représentait un danger pour les enfants, amplifiant ainsi une panique morale selon laquelle les personnes trans sont intrinsèquement dangereuses pour la sécurité des enfants.

Une pétition en soutien à l'employée du Space Camp a été lancée par le groupe Alabama Transgender Rights Action Coalition.

- Petit point sur l’affaire "WPATH Files".

Qu’est-ce que c’est que ce truc ?

C’est un document publié par des groupes anti-trans et promu par des activistes de droite, qui prétend révéler des scandales médicaux majeurs au sein de la WPATH (la World Professional Association for Transgender Health).

Ces fameux fichiers ont été rapidement partagés par presque toutes les grandes organisations anti-trans ainsi que par les journalistes qui les soutiennent.

Sauf qu’un examen minutieux effectué par la journaliste Erin Reed a révélé que ce dernier était truffé d’erreurs. 216 pour être précis ! Ce qui est juste énorme ! Parmi elles on retrouve des erreurs de citation ou encore d’interprétations trompeuses. En effet, le rapport déforme souvent les citations et les données médicales, mélange identité de genre et sexualité, et présente de manière fallacieuse des échanges cliniques ordinaires comme des preuves de scandale. On peut y retrouver en plus une sélection biaisée et décontextualisée de messages de forums médicaux.

Et surtout, il y a un aspects assez marquant du document qui critique les faibles taux de regrets chez les personnes trans, suggérant que leur bonheur serait "suspect". Littéralement les transitions fonctionnent, c’est tellement inconcevable et chelou pour les transphobes que ça en devient suspect !

Bref, on est face à un rapport chargé de manipulations visant à discréditer la WPATH.

- Twitter interdit de nouveau le mégenrage et le deadnaming suite à la mise à jour plus que discrète de ses conditions d’utilisation. La conséquence ne sera que de "réduire la visibilité des publications" enfreignant à répétition cette politique. Cela ne s'appliquera que "là où les lois locales l'exigent" et ce sera à la victime de faire le signalement.

De plus, Elon Musk, le propriétaire de la plateforme, connu pour ses positions transphobes, a laissé entendre qu'il pourrait annuler à nouveau la politique et que cette dernière ne sera appliquée qu’au cas par cas. Chaya Raichik, qui gère le compte transphobe Libs of TikTok, a reçu la confirmation de Musk lui assurant qu'elle ne serait pas suspendue malgré ses nombreuses violations de la politique…

- On poursuit avec une info toujours en lien avec les réseaux sociaux. Un rapport GLAAD dénonce que Meta, propriétaire de Facebook, Instagram, WhatsApp et Threads, malgré ses politiques d’utilisation interdisant la transphobie, tolère toujours de manière flagrante et récurrente les contenus haineux et discriminatoires envers les personnes trans sur ses plateformes.

On parle de contenus incluant des attaques haineuses, des allégations de "grooming", des mensonges sur les soins de santé trans, des discours de déshumanisation, des appels à la violence et même des incitations au suicide.

Malgré de nombreux appels à l'action et les preuves fournies par la communauté LGBTQ+, Meta ne semble pas faire respecter ses propres politiques, laissant ainsi un environnement toxique et dangereux pour les personnes LGBTQ+ sur ses plateformes.

- Selon un autre sondage GLAAD, plus de 50 % des électeurices inscrit·es s'opposent à un ou une candidate qui parle fréquemment de restreindre l'accès aux soins de santé et à la participation aux sports pour les jeunes trans.

Cette opposition pourrait être préjudiciable à certain·es républicain·es qui ont largement adopté des messages anti-trans en vue des élections de novembre, bien que cette stratégie ait eu déjà peu de succès lors des élections de mi-mandat de 2022.

- Suite de l’affaire Nex Benedict.

Le procureur du comté de Tulsa a déclaré qu’un « dépôt d’accusations criminelles n’est pas justifié » pour cette affaire. Ce qui signifie qu’il n’y aurait pas d'accusations, ni de répercussion pour les 3 élèves qui ont attaqué violemment Nex Benedict la veille de sa mort. Le procureur a qualifié l’altercation d’« exemple de combat mutuel »…

Seconde info toujours concernant Nex Benedict :

Le rapport d’une page du médecin légiste de l’Oklahoma indique que l’ado se serait suicidé. La cause probable du décès est répertoriée comme étant une surdose d’un combo de Benadryl et de Prozac. Selon le Center for Disease Control and Prevention, ce sont deux médicaments couramment utilisés lors des tentatives de suicide.

Bon.. Il y a quelques petites choses à détricoter là-dedans.

De 1) Même en tenant compte de la question du suicide de Nex Benedict (qui reste douteux – je reviendrai sur ça juste après), l'agression qui l'a conduit à l'hôpital reste un crime de haine. Et le fait qu'une personne se suicide après avoir été victime d'un tel crime est aussi grave que la mort d'un ado dans un homicide transphobe. Je le dis parce que la thèse du suicide a fait que certaines personnes transphobes minimisaient l’agression, en disant « Bah vous voyez encore un trans qui se fou en l’air ! Ça n’avait rien à voir au final. ». (Les gens sont décidément toujours autant empathiques, ça fait plaisir à voir…)

Et de 2) donc cette conclusion un peu étrange du suicide :

La famille de Nex Benedict a publié des informations qui ont été exclues du rapport du médecin légiste de l'Oklahoma. On peut y retrouver de multiples contusions, de multiples hémorragies, de multiples lacérations et de multiples écorchures qui ont été trouvées sur sa tête, qui démontrent de la gravité de l'agression avant sa mort.

Nex a été décrit dans l’appel au 911 comme étant « posturing ». Ça fait référence soit à « decerebrate posturing » (une posture décérébrée), soit à « decorticate posturing » (une posture décortiquée) qui, dans les deux cas, sont des indicateurs assez clairs d'une lésion cérébrale grave.

Et il ne faut pas oublier non plus, que le gamin a été reconduit chez lui sans qu’une période observatoire suffisante (à savoir 72h dans ce genre de blessure) n’aie été mise en place par l’hôpital. Ce qui pourrait expliquer la prise d’auto-médication pour se soulager.

Donc, ça reste bizarre.

Suite à cette affaire, le ministère de l'Éducation à ouvert une enquête fédérale. Ça a également permis d’attirer l’attention sur la récente nomination de Chaya Raichik, la fondatrice des Libs de TikTok, à un rôle consultatif au sein du ministère de l'Éducation de l'État d'Oklahoma (bien qu’elle ne vive pas dans cet état). Et des groupes de parents ont appelé, dans une lettre ouverte, l’influenceuse transphobe à « rester en dehors de [leur] État. ».

- Alex Franco, un jeune homme trans de 21 ans, a été tué par balle par 3 ado (âgés respectivement de 15, 17 et 17 ans) dans l'Utah. Alex avait été signalé disparu par sa petite amie. Suite à des recherches policières, son corps a été retrouvé dans une zone désertique de l'Utah. Les ado ont été arrêtés et inculpés pour son enlèvement et son meurtre.

Un mémorial pour lui rendre hommage a été organisé par les amis et la famille d'Alex.

- Une étude Media Matters a révélé que la couverture médiatique de la législation anti-trans en 2023 – en particulier, dans le cas des lois qui cherchaient à interdire ou à restreindre l'accès des personnes trans aux soins d'affirmation de genre ou aux établissements publics – variait considérablement en termes de ton et de temps passé sur les chaînes câblées.

Bien que toutes les chaînes, indépendamment de leur orientation politique, aient abordé le même sujet, la manière dont elles l'ont traité différait considérablement.

Sur MSNBC et CNN, respectivement 42 % et 36 % des segments ont utilisé des recherches pour contredire les narratifs anti-trans ou la désinformation, tandis que sur Fox News, 49 % des segments ont soutenu des restrictions sur les soins d'affirmation de genre ou l'accès aux toilettes pour les personnes trans.

Malgré ces différences dans la manière dont ces réseaux ont abordé ces lois en termes de ton et de temps alloué, très peu de segments ont donné la parole à des personnes trans. Sur MSNBC, seulement 22 % des segments ont inclus des invité·es ouvertement trans. Sur CNN, ce chiffre s'élevait à 16 %. Et la situation était encore plus catastrophique sur Fox News, où aucune présence trans n'a été observée, quand bien même le réseau compte parmi ses employé·es la personnalité trans Caitlyn Jenner. (Bon pour cette dernière, honnêtement ce n’est pas plus mal hein. Elle a encore déclaré ce mois-ci que les femmes trans ne sont pas de « vraies femmes » et a appelé au retour des tests chromosomiques dans le sport. Comment tirer contre son propre camp…)

En 2024, la persistance de la tendance à la législation anti-trans souligne une fois de plus l'importance capitale des médias dans la manière dont les expériences des personnes trans, les plus directement touchées par ces initiatives législatives, sont couvertes et comprises.

- Plus d'une douzaine d'athlètes universitaires ont intenté un recours collectif contre la National College Athletics Association (la NCAA), alléguant que l'organisation violait leurs droits en vertu de l'article IX en permettant aux athlètes trans de participer aux compétitions féminines.

Les 16 plaignantes, dont l'ancienne nageuse de l'Université du Kentucky Riley Gaines, accusent la NCAA de violer la loi fédérale anti-discrimination et de ne pas fournir un traitement égal aux femmes en permettant aux athlètes trans de concourir dans les ligues correspondant à leur identité de genre.

Iels cherchent des dommages punitifs pour le « stress émotionnel » occasionné, le retrait de Lia Thomas et d'autres athlètes trans des records officiels des femmes de la NCAA, ainsi qu'une interdiction des femmes trans dans les vestiaires féminins.

- Planet Fitness a exclu une de ses adhérentes pour avoir pris une photo d'une femme supposée trans dans ses vestiaires féminins qu’elle a ensuite partagé sur le net.

Malgré les objections persistantes de Patricia Silva, la femme exclue – accessoirement partisane de Donald Trump –, la salle de sport a maintenu sa décision de résilier son abonnement en raison de la violation de la politique interdisant de prendre des photos dans les vestiaires. Et en a profité pour réaffirmer son engagement de longue date envers un environnement inclusif et respectueux de l'identité de genre de ses membres.

Silva s’est plainte sur Facebook que, je cite « Planet Fitness [avait] annulé [son] adhésion et a permis au pédophile de rester. » Ses propos ont été relayées par la suite par le compte anti-trans Libs of TikTok qui a appelé au boycott de la salle de sport.

- Et pour terminer, un récent sondage en Caroline du Sud révèle que 71 % des électeurices inscrit·es, y compris une majorité de républicains et républicaines, estiment que le gouvernement ne devrait pas intervenir dans les décisions médicales concernant les soins de santé des jeunes trans, à partir du moment où les parents sont impliqué·es dans cette prise de décision.

La Caroline du Sud reste l’un des rares États contrôlés par les Républicains à ne pas avoir interdit les soins d’affirmation de genre pour les mineur·es et jeunes trans.

Du coup c’est intéressant d’avoir un résultat aussi marqué dans un contexte où une proposition de loi allant dans ce sens est actuellement à l'étude.

------

🔗 Les sources :

📺 Accéder à l'épisode avec ses sous-titres : 

🎧 Accéder à l'épisode au format audio :

#t news #transidentité #intersexe #nhs #jk rowling #HAS #transidentification des mineurs #Nébido #Noa-Lyn van Leuven #Sweet Baby Inc #NCAA #WPATH Files #GLAAD #Nex Benedict #Spotify

[gwiazdaerydanu]

#WIDESPREAD MEDICAL MALPRACTICE ON CHILDREN AND VULNERABLE ADULTS AT GLOBAL TRANSGENDER HEALTHCARE AUTHORITY #THE WPATH FILES AND REPORT

[kthulhu42]

I encourage you to read the entire article, but consider the fact that a gender therapist over the course of fifteen years only declined treatment to one patient. One.

Yet when I talk about my friend who detransitioned, who was sexually assaulted and - by her own admission - should never have transitioned socially or surgically, people are quick to tell me that getting hormones and surgery is so difficult trans patients are forced to lie or use a script in order to obtain them.

And "it is out of their developmental range to understand the extent [of these medical interventions]" is absolutely horrifying.

#radblr #radical feminism #terfblr #gender critical #medical transition #Medical malpractice #child experimentation

[religion-is-a-mental-illness]

This level of deranged academic gibberish is a symptom of a degenerative brain disorder resulting from excessive exposure to Judith Butler.

#Mia Hughes #WPATH #The WPATH Files #WPATH Files #World Professional Association for Transgender Health #jargonese #academese #gibberish #postmodern nonsense #postmodern gibberish #gender ideology #queer theory #gender identity ideology #intersectional feminism #religion is a mental illness