Erin Reed / Anthony Reed II / @ErinInTheMorn / @ErinInTheMorning / @ErinInTheNight / _supernovasky_ / beholderseye / realitybias / AnonymousRabbit - post-op transbian Twitter/TikTok "activist" with bad fashion, giant Reddit tattoo. Former drug dealer with felony. Married to Zooey Simone Zephyr / Zachary Todd Raasch.

[TruffleSpark]

Nah, the mere existence of actual females who won't go anywhere near his stink ditch makes "prison gay" Tony very put out.

Yeah, it must sting knowing that even an extremely unfeminine woman like KC is still more of a woman than Tony will ever be no matter how many surgeries he has.

 

[Konig]

Probably more of the same, line by line of “omg” “this bitch” “NAWT TRUE” “you’re gonna get us killed” “we are so strong and inspiring”

And outright lying, as is tradition. Tony says "Her first source, used to support "Rapid Onset Gender Dysphoria," is an article by Lisa Littman that has been retracted."

However both the NYT and Tony link to a retracted paper by Suzanna Diaz & J. Michael Bailey. Littman's paper is not retracted. He then tries to paint her as evil for associating with Leo Sapir and Kenneth Zucker, pulling out the scary conversion therapy narrative on the latter.

Alot of it is using the same old talking points covered before. E.g., "A study in the prestigious journal Pediatrics entirely debunked the concept of ROGD, determining that most transgender people know their gender identity for years before they come out and seek treatment for gender dysphoria."

The "pivotal study" that Tony links is Bauer et al 2021. It cannot "debunk" anything because it defines ROGD to mean something entirely different — those who attend a gender clinic within 1 year of "realizing" that their "gender was different from what other people" call them. For comparison the Littman definition is adolescents and young adults who develop a transgender identification without a history of childhood GD.

As Littman pointed out in a letter to the journal, it’s entirely possible that there are ROGD adolescents in both the study and the control groups of Bauer et al. Saying that Bauer et al studied rapid onset gender dysphoria is inaccurate and misleading - The Journal of Pediatrics (archive). A similar point was made separately in a letter from Joanne Sinai, a Canadian psychiatrist: Rapid onset gender dysphoria as a distinct clinical phenomenon - The Journal of Pediatrics (archive).

 

[Geranium]

However both the NYT and Tony link to a retracted paper by Suzanna Diaz & J. Michael Bailey.

The Diaz & Bailey paper was only retracted because troons complained, so Springer Nature invented a standard that, if applied consistently, would have led to the retraction of thousands of papers, including ones by Jack Turban.

More background here:

The Diaz & Bailey paper is being retracted because troons don't like its findings, that's it. They tried the same thing with Lisa Littman's ROGD paper: the publisher pulled it pending a review, and then republished it unchanged.

Paper has since been republished:

It’s not new, just a republication of the Bailey-Diaz paper that got retracted from Archives of Sexual Behaviour because the troons had a fit.

The paper was retracted by Springer Nature, supposedly, because while the consent forms said the data would be published, they didn’t say specifically that the data would be published in an academic journal. Such a standard is unheard of, and if applied generally would likely lead to the retraction of hundreds of thousands of other papers published by Springer Nature, including ones by Jack Turban.

 

[Positron]

 

[TyrasGuard]

View attachment 5694683

Usually I don't pay that much attention to it but the mounds and mounds of GARBAGE that is produced by these gender freaks like articles, studies, presentations, video essays, social media posts, etc. Is mindblowing to me, without mentioning the other mound of shit people have to do to disprove them since basic logic doesn't work anymore.

The time and resources spent to convince the general public to let troons inject shit into your kids is something that legitimately awes me when I think about it. Imagine having an entire library's worth of useless knowledge.

 

[glioblastoma multiforme]

View attachment 5694683

Went onto his twitter to find the "name your price" bit in the screenshots and didn't find them. Is this because a) I'm a big dumb dumb who can't see, b) I'm rushing cos I'm already on the clock for work, kinda a kinder variant of a) this one, or c) it isn't there?

While there found this. His totally irrelevant commentary "Like just look at this... is this the kind of "scientific, factual integrity" we should expect for the "paper of record"?" - where is the lack of factual integrity? They are simply asking a question.

Loads of papers are written based on whatever records researchers can dig up, and at least they are asking for it from clinicians, not a fucking self report internet survey. I haven't seen them asking on twitter before, but that doesn't preclude them having reached out to institutions in private. His blatant attempt to poison the well falls flat IMO. Tony, just wait til the paper is published so you can come up with some argument to discredit it that demonstrates you didn't even read the abstract, its funnier.

https://twitter.com/ErinInTheMorn/status/1753974872131117299

https://ghostarchive.org/archive/SgG79

Also retweeted someone who had taken an arbtrary subsample (well, top 5 men and women from France with no explanation of why sampling was taken in this way) of some data to try to discredit the male advantage in chess:



Yeah no shit people who can't even make the top 1000 are a more even playing field, they will not be putting in the intensive time and coaching. Are you saying the the biological advantages that get amplified to shit by professional training should be expected of people distinctly in the middle of the field? What is the hypothesis here and what do these 10 ranks say about it? This is not how we statistics Tony, and you know that. What is the sex distribution at the very bottom of the ranking records?

https://twitter.com/IglesiasYosha/status/1754247845203316799

https://ghostarchive.org/archive/JB9Fl

 

[Geranium]

Also retweeted someone who had taken an arbtrary subsample (well, top 5 men and women from France with no explanation of why sampling was taken in this way) of some data to try to discredit the male advantage in chess:

Tony posted a follow-up tweet which I actually agree with: there are fewer women in chess because of creepy men!

Erin Reed • @ErinInTheMorn • 2024-02-05 04:58:32 UTC
I’ve never seen a more easy way to explain why there are so few women in chess and at high levels of chess.

Elon Musk retweets a claim that men have a biological advantage at chess.

Then some chess enthusiast reply guy goes ultra creep mode on women players.

Thats why.

So obviously we should let said creepy men play in the women's tournaments!

---

I read Pamela Paul's New York Times article on detransitioners this morning, along with Tony's "debunking" of it, which was published on his Substack blog and reprinted verbatim by The Advocate.

Pamela Paul's article: Opinion | As Kids, They Thought They Were Trans. They No Longer Do. - The New York Times (archive; archive via Tor)
Tony's blog: Debunked: Misleading NYT Anti-Trans Article By Pamela Paul Relies On Pseudoscience (archive; archive via Tor)
Reprinted at The Advocate: Latest NYT anti-trans article relies on pseudoscience (archive; archive via Tor)

When I read Paul's article I kept thinking "how is Tony meant to 'debunk' this?", because really all Paul does is set out that there is a dispute over treatment approaches. Tony's "debunking" is really nothing of the sort. He paraphrases bits of Paul's article where she cites arguments he disagrees with, and responds to those.

But Paul is very even handed. At most, you could say that she argues that there are at least some people for whom the affirmative approach doesn't work (whom she interviews).

Ultimately I think this is an attempt, through hysterical whinging, to return to the past situation where it was forbidden to discuss alternatives to affirmation. The most consequential part of Tony's "debunking" is the first paragraph:

In an article published in the opinion section of The New York Times, opinion columnist Pamela Paul wrote a 4,500-word article filled with factual errors and unfounded assumptions about transgender care and the lived experiences of transgender people. Although the article is presented as a piece on detransitioners, the interviews serve as vehicles through which Paul packages inaccuracies and disinformation with faulty citations and claims that are not supported by the evidence she presents. The article is the latest in a series published by The New York Times to do so, and a simple fact check of the claims presented easily debunks the article's central premises as highly misleading.

We've had several cases in the past where a fairly anodyne article is published and the troons freak out, leading to the outlet to apologise or whatever. This is Tony's call to arms, to get trannies bleating: "It's full of factual errors! It's inaccurate! It's disinformation!" in the hope that it will chasten New York Times editors and make them wary of touching the subject again.

I've gone through Tony's specific points below. I've mostly just addressed his "claim/fact" bits; the paragraphs that follow them are just typical Tony verbiage, repeating things that we've gone over ad nauseam by now.

---

Claim: Rapid onset gender dysphoria and transgender social contagion is making people trans.

Fact: Rapid onset gender dysphoria and transgender social contagion is not a validated theory, has been widely debunked as pseudoscience by major medical organizations.

Paul addresses this controversy in the article. Rather than acknowledge there is a disagreement here, Tony just takes one side.

While professional associations say there is a lack of quality research on rapid onset gender dysphoria, several researchers have documented the phenomenon, and many health care providers have seen evidence of it in their practices.

Tony continues to lie about what happened to the Littman paper. He repeats this lie in a short update he added at the end:

Post publication edit: Originally, the article read that Paul relied on a study by Lisa Littman that was retracted. This is corrected to read that Paul cited a separate study, which was itself retracted. Littman’s study was removed and republished with a correction noting that her research "does not validate the phenomenon" of social contagion with an apology from the journal.

More on Littman's original ROGD paper:

Tony, man, you've got to know that Littman's paper was not retracted. Surely.

He also lies (by omission) about Ken Zucker. Zucker’s clinic was closed, then Zucker sued, winning an apology and more than $500,000. More on Zucker:

Then Tony goes on to attack Kenneth Zucker with a report that CAMH apologized for and gave Zucker over half a million dollars in damages for publishing (troons never mention this part, but Jesse Singal does which is stochastic terrorism)

Tony weirdly describes Bailey as "Littman’s treasurer", when he is obviously a renowned researcher in his own right. Tony also lies by omission about the Diaz-Bailey paper; it was retracted by Springer Nature on a standard that Springer Nature has never applied to any other paper.

This the recent Diaz & Bailey paper on ROGD.

In general, Paul describes that there is a dispute, and Tony fails to realise that he is one of the parties to the dispute that Paul described; the side that refuses to take its opponents’ arguments seriously.

---

Claim: Stephanie Winn, a "licensed marriage and family therapist," spoke out in favor of "approach gender dysphoria in a more considered way" but then was "investigated" for conversion therapy.

Fact: Stephanie Winn suggested the treatment of transgender youth with acupuncture to "see if they like having needles put in them" and stating it could "help spark desistance." She also pushed the idea that transgender men should be estrogen to make them feel more feminine.

Tony’s "fact" is not a response to the claim. Tony attacks Winn for practising "cruel, coercive, and painful conversion therapy techniques", with his evidence being a blog post in which Winn contemplates several things including acupuncture to "spark the creative mind in ways that might, for someone, somewhere, illuminate something that could be helpful".

("should be estrogen" appears verbatim in the Advocate article; so clearly it’s just been republished without any changes.)

---

Claim: Transgender people may actually just be gay, and transitioning is a form of "conversion therapy."

Fact: Gender and sexuality are different, many transgender people identify as gay or bisexual after transition, and gay acceptance is higher than trans acceptance.

This doesn’t address the claim. The following paragraphs are about how people dislike troons more than gays, and the refrain of "couldn’t you have just been gay?" But Paul isn’t suggesting that all trans-identified people are gay.

---

Claim: 80% of transgender individuals desist from being transgender if they go through puberty without intervention, and another study suggests that 30% of individuals stop taking hormone therapy medication.

Fact: Detransition rates are estimated to be between 1-4%. The study citing an 80% detransition rate is based on faulty outdated data, using criteria no longer in use. Furthermore, the study indicating a 30% discontinuation rate is based on military families not refilling their prescriptions through Tricare, rather than actual discontinuation of hormone therapy.

We have no idea what detransition rates are. Paul covers this in the article; effectively no detransitioners tell their gender docs, and we know from Jamie Reed and the Tavistock that not all clinics keep such records.

The Detransition Rate Is Unknown | Archives of Sexual Behavior (archive; archive via Tor)

I actually agree with Tony that we can’t rely on older studies, even those conducted 10–20 years ago, because the current cohort is so different (ROGD!). Conversely, it’s difficult to study desistence among trans-identified people who are "affirmed", as this may help to cement a transgender identity (as Paul mentions and as Hilary Cass discusses in her interim report).

 

[behindyourightnow]

Yeah no shit people who can't even make the top 1000 are a more even playing field, they will not be putting in the intensive time and coaching. Are you saying the the biological advantages that get amplified to shit by professional training should be expected of people distinctly in the middle of the field? What is the hypothesis here and what do these 10 ranks say about it? This is not how we statistics Tony, and you know that. What is the sex distribution at the very bottom of the ranking records?

Not to mention that the male variability hypothesis suggests that top-level talent should be disproportionately male, and that medium-level talent should be more balanced. I don't know if the variability hypothesis actually explains chess disparities, but this person doesn't even seem aware of it.

Also, why France? Did he look through countries until he found one that matched his data? That's about standard for troon "science" I suppose.

I honestly don't even know what these people are trying to argue. If there are no biological differences between male and female brains on average, doesn't that destroy their narrative of transwomen having "female brains"?

 

[Dromedary]

View attachment 5694683

Evan Urqhart is a trans "man" who lies about everything- "Puberty blockers are safe and reversible!" who's inexplicably ruled Slate's comment section severely for 15 years with a Stalinist relish for censorship. Beyond heavy-handed. Absolutely no dissent from tranny propaganda allowed. "Assigned Media" sounds like an organization but it's just her. Presenting as some serious media org with multiple employees but it's just her doing freelance trans psyops. I've already seen tweets, "Assigned Media debunked Pamela Paul's NYT piece!", and no she absolutely didn't.

 

[Geranium]

Evan Urqhart is a trans "man" who lies about everything

More on Urquhart (AssignedMedia) here, in which she lies about the gender treatment changes in Europe:

Tony retweeted Vanessa Vitiello Urquhart / Evan Urquhart. Urquhart is a try-hard lesbian TIF who blogs at assignedmedia.org and who is just really bad at it, like really bad, worse than Tony bad. Embarrassing. … Anyway, she’s written a blog post supposedly about what’s going on in the UK (England, really), Sweden, Finland, and Norway.

 

[Dromedary]

More on Urquhart (AssignedMedia) here, in which she lies about the gender treatment changes in Europe:

nice, thanks.

 

[luigismanslave]

Not to mention that the male variability hypothesis suggests that top-level talent should be disproportionately male, and that medium-level talent should be more balanced. I don't know if the variability hypothesis actually explains chess disparities, but this person doesn't even seem aware of it.

Also, why France? Did he look through countries until he found one that matched his data? That's about standard for troon "science" I suppose.

I honestly don't even know what these people are trying to argue. If there are no biological differences between male and female brains on average, doesn't that destroy their narrative of transwomen having "female brains"?

they're just grasping at straws with the tranny sports argument. the general public has said no to tranny swimmers and runners, so they're trying to call people sexist by pointing out men do better in chess and darts, or something. it's just embarassing desperation.

 

[Haram-Habibi]

It wouldn't be a proper Tony article if he didn't cite himself as an authority.....which he does, right at the end. (Along with a couple of our fave cows, natch.)

 

[Geranium]

It wouldn't be a proper Tony article if he didn't cite himself as an authority.....which he does, right at the end. (Along with a couple of our fave cows, natch.)

It cracks me up that Tony is so unhesitant to cite Zinnia Jones / Zach Antolak, when it doesn't take much searching to find out that his previous favourite pastime on the Internet was to publish videos of himself inserting large dildos into his anus.

His thread for the unaware:

ZINNIA JONES IS MAD AT THE INTERNET​

Edit: Didn't quite realise how open he was about his degeneracy on Twitter:

Zinnia Jones • @ZJemptv • 5:33 PM • Sep 3, 2023

The entire situation has put me off the motif of "protecting children" so badly, at this point I literally only care about the rights of single people and polycules to do drugs and make porn

Transgender Expert Zinnia Jones: "I literally only care about the rights of single people and polycules to do drugs and make porn"

Since Twitter is so bad at letting you archive whole threads now, I saved a few choice tweets in that thread for posterity:

(Earlier) Edit: Just checked and our Zac hasn't updated his December campaign finance report to include donors' details. I just noticed, though, that he listed his end-of-period "fundraiser" (which didn't happen) as having zero attendees and having sold zero tickets:


Seems legit!

 

[Accept Only Substitutes]

We have no idea what detransition rates are. Paul covers this in the article; effectively no detransitioners tell their gender docs, and we know from Jamie Reed and the Tavistock that not all clinics keep such records.

It gets worse. If a detransitioner does go back to their clinic, sometimes they're told they never went to that clinic in the first place.

Which tells me that these assholes are knowingly going against their oaths to do no harm. Why else would you obviously try to cover your ass from malpractice lawsuits like that?

 

[Jacques1194]

The Advocate had Tony deboonk the NYT article.

Here's an archived copy if anyone wats to read it. https://archive.is/v48g1

It's quite long. I started it but don't have time to finish reading it at the moment.

There are better Kiwis than me to critique it, anyway.

In regards to the NYT's articles about troons, and more specifically the one Tony is trying to refute, to give people context, the top comment on most NYT stories will have between 500 and 800 recommends.The top comment on the story tony is trying to refute is now pushing 6000 recommends, and here it is:

I predict we will look back on this period with the same disgust we feel about the overprescription of amphetamines like Adderall to every 8-year-old boy who couldn't sit still for an entire day. The most damage is often done by doctors and parents who are so well-meaning that they cease to think critically. [NYT user "Tony"]

What's strange is that if you go to any pro troon NYT articles, the comments are usually disabled and you can never see them.Obviously the NYT is a left leaning news outlet, but the fact that they disable comments on pro trans articles, but keep up ones that come from articles that are GC should be eye opening.Especially since on the GC ones, the comments are opened with 90% of people agreeing with it.EDIT:I just noticed the guy who made the comment was a user named Tony lol.

 

[scathefire]

When I read Paul's article I kept thinking "how is Tony meant to 'debunk' this?", because really all Paul does is set out that there is a dispute over treatment approaches. Tony's "debunking" is really nothing of the sort. He paraphrases bits of Paul's article where she cites arguments he disagrees with, and responds to those.

All this time I haven't been able to understand how ROGD has been "debunked". Debunked how? What is there to debunk? It's a simple observation that many young girls with no long-term history of dysphoria have been rapidly developing it. This whole article is so fucking dumb. It's like saying "I've never looked through a microscope at plant cells, therefore plants do not have cells and it has been debunked". Meanwhile it takes like 2 seconds of basic observation and/or critical thinking to prove him wrong.

Gender and sexuality are different, many transgender people identify as gay or bisexual after transition, and gay acceptance is higher than trans acceptance.

The only reason some of them identify as gay after transition is because they're straight men and women who want to be opposite-sex homosexuals. I see no way how those people have anything to do with "gay acceptance". It moreso goes against gay acceptance for reasons that have been reiterated time and time again.

 

[Accept Only Substitutes]

All this time I haven't been able to understand how ROGD has been "debunked". Debunked how? What is there to debunk?

Debunked is another word like euphoria, that means something different to tras than it does to humans.

We hear debunked and we think of something like Snopes, or community notes on Twitter, an attempt to use sources and facts to clarify the account or correct actual misinformation.

Tras use it to mean: it's not true because we said it's not true and you can't debate us, that's bigotry.

I am glad to see evidence that no debate is being done away with. Anything or anyone who says you can't ask questions, any questions at all, is toxic. The axiom has always been no such thing as a stupid question, because no matter how much education people have no one will know everything about anything. Questions are how we learn, it's the very foundation of education and especially the foundation of science. Which they claim to love, except for the pesky questions.

 

[Geranium]

All this time I haven't been able to understand how ROGD has been "debunked". Debunked how? What is there to debunk? It's a simple observation that many young girls with no long-term history of dysphoria have been rapidly developing it.

This is why trans activists redefine ROGD to mean something like “knowing you were the opposite gender x years before coming out”, as opposed to Littman’s (roughly) trans-identification in adolescence with no history of childhood gender dyphoria.

They change the criteria and then say: “these people don’t meet the criteria! OMG DEBUNKED”. It doesn’t hurt that they change an objective measure, observable by third parties (parents, doctors), to a subjective one that can only ever be self-reported.

 

[Flamin Park]

I know we all miss Tony’s fashion selfies, especially because they showed his tragic shoe choices for full comedic effect. But have we discussed this top?? Tone is digging through his trash bags of church-lady handouts again because this may be his ugliest item of clothing in a very competitive field:
View attachment 5685193
This haircut has him looking like Lord Farquaad.
View attachment 5685194
Tony get some color depositing conditioner, christ these skinwalkers are so lazy with their hair.
He’s mostly wearing these really cheap looking political shirts now (that isn’t even the Barbie font).

@Trombonista I lost my ability to edit title/post polls when Tony was (rightfully) moved to the Stinkditch - can we edit his title to reflect being fiancé to Zooey Simone Zephyr / Zachary Todd Raasch?

That first top looks like the wallpaper in a run down 90s Indian restaurant