Simon Sun and company discuss their desire to test GAT in rats. Paper here.
Abstract:
We have recently proposed experimental design guidelines and areas of study for preclinical rodent models of gender-affirming hormone therapy in neuroscience. These guidelines also apply to any field subject to the influences of gonadal steroid hormones, including metabolism and growth, cancer, and physiology. This perspective briefly describes our suggestions for these fields. Studying the effects of exogenous steroid hormones will have translational benefits for the community. We also discuss the need for equitable practices for cisgender scientists who wish to implement these guidelines and engage with the community. It is necessary that community-informed practices are implemented in preclinical research to maximize the benefit to transgender, nonbinary, and/or gender diverse (TNG) healthcare, which is currently in jeopardy in the United States, Europe, and across the globe.
Oh I cannot imagine there'd be any ulterior motive in this, no sir.
The gonadal steroid hormones estrogen, progesterone, and testosterone have been used by people for sex/gender transition since their initial discovery approximately a century ago. In the decades since, the use of these hormones as gender-affirming hormone therapy (GAHT) became widespread among transgender individuals for biomedical sex/gender transition (for historical reviews of hormonal and other treatments of transgender children and adults, see [1].
He references another troon, Jules Gills Peterson, who wrote a seminal book on the trans child. He also has another book published this year, 'A Short History of Trans Misogyny', which will surely have a place in the 'Trans Made Media' thread.
Although the precise influences of gonadal steroid hormones on mental health are unclear (and likely dependent on social and environmental context), GAHT is clearly associated with improvements in mental health—regardless of formulation [2].
"We don't know but give us the hormones anyways or else we'll kill ourselves."
Nevertheless, there remains a dearth of research into the mechanisms by which GAHT improves mental health outcomes. This lack of research is used by anti-transgender activists to justify discriminatory practices and limit access to or outright deny care. An increasing number of states in the USA have enacted new laws and regulations limiting the ability of transgender children to access GAHT, which de facto forces some children to medically detransition [3]. As of June 2023, the number of states limiting access to care has increased to 20. In some states, implementation of laws banning GAHT for children also result in de facto bans for adult GAHT [4]. The current sociocultural and geopolitical moment, in combination with the difficulty of mechanistic neuroendocrine studies in humans, points to an urgent need for well-designed preclinical studies.
I guess all those suggestions never panned out, eh? Here I thought none of these 'sex hormones' were specific to a certain sex. Glad to see Sun did a 180 on it when it applies to his special group.
To address this exigent issue, we recently published a review outlining how to best design such studies [5]. Studies on the influence of estrogen-based GAHT (E-GAHT)/testosterone-based GAHT (T-GAHT) on physiological or neurological processes should be evaluated on whether “classic” endocrinological techniques (gonadectomy with surgical pellet implantation) or new GAHT models are most appropriate. In our review, we proposed best practices for experimental design that recapitulate the human experience of GAHT, such as comparing intact rodents with gonadectomized rodents, applying steroid replacement to both, and treating with androgen receptor blockers commonly used in E-GAHT. This work should focus on the needs of transgender populations. Here, we provide a brief overview of our recommendations for preclinical rodent models of GAHT and emphasize how this research should be conducted to address the material health needs of transgender populations.
Experimenting on poor mice to get those magic girl juice drugs. They deserve better.
Receptors and Gene Expression
Gonadal hormones (estrogens, progestins, and androgens) exert their effects by acting as ligands to their cognate receptors. The most well-studied of the hormone receptors are the canonical nuclear receptors: estrogen receptor alpha and beta (ERα, ERβ), androgen receptor (AR), and progesterone receptors (PR-A, PR-B). These receptors are expressed at varying levels throughout the brain, with notably denser expression in subcortical regions important for social behavior, stress responses, metabolism, mood/affect, memory, and cognition. Therefore, understanding the mechanisms by which gonadal hormones influence these aspects of neural function is fundamental for improving GAHT.
If you recall Sun's previous paper, he argued that there was no such thing as 'male' or 'female' sex hormones, and that the gonads didn't really play a role in their development; or, at the very least, they do not make a sexed body. But when it comes to demanding hormones for trans people, he throws that out and takes the bioessentialist position he so hates.
Nuclear hormone receptors regulate gene expression to drive changes in neural circuit wiring, synaptic strength, and neural activity. When bound with their ligand, these receptors interact with the genome, acting as transcription factors and modifying chromatin profiles [6]. Recent research indicates that sex variability in neuronal gene expression is reliant on the acute hormonal environment, suggesting a potential mechanism by which GAHT can flexibly influence neuronal function throughout an individual's lifetime [7]. Additionally, gonadal hormones can act on nonneuronal populations, including microglia and astrocytes and may contribute to the mental health benefits associated with GAHT. Future research that links hormone-dependent neuronal activity changes with hormone-dependent gene regulation could reveal molecular pathways for personalized GAHT.
"Sex doesn't exist, but it does, and we need specific pathways to get personalized healthcare for a group that wants to be something that doesn't exist."
Membrane-bound hormone receptors are found on both the plasma membrane and the surface of organelles. Once ligand-bound, these receptors are often thought to initiate molecular cascades, leading to changes in cell function and behavior. The timescale of action is hypothesized to lead to parallel mechanisms of intracellular action in concert with nuclear receptor activation. Future research on GAHT could illuminate the interplay between membrane-bound receptors and nuclear receptors and interrogate how each receptor-type distinctly affects cellular function in multiple tissue-types.
You know that if they found anything bad resulting from their little titty skittles that it would never see the light of day. These drugs are straight miracles to them; they ain't never giving up that faith.
Cognition/Memory
Cognition, memory, and learning are influenced by gonadal hormones, and many of the brain regions involved in cognition express steroid receptors. However, evidence that estrogen replacement therapies can protect against cognitive decline remains controversial. Studies in cisgender humans partially support the hypothesis that steroids influence cognition and memory in older adults across sex. The influence of GAHT on cognitive measures in transgender, nonbinary, and/or gender diverse (TNG) people—in youth seeking to delay puberty or in older TNG individuals with years of GAHT—remains largely unknown. More clinical and preclinical studies are needed to assess the mechanisms of GAHT on cognition and memory and the interactions of GAHT and social/minority stressors in young and aging TNG populations.
They don't know, yet they demand kids get these 'treatments' anyways or else they'll die. This is purely an experimental procedure where they don't even have a solid percentage of success. The few studies we do know of show neurological degeneration in puberty blocked kids, but troons always throw a fit over it. Troon scientists acting as gatekeepers will prevent the facts from ever getting out.
Mood/Stress Disorders
Hormonal milieus interacting with multiple brain regions lead to differences in the etiology, symptomology, and effectiveness of treatments for mood and stress disorders. Evidence that GAHT alters stress reactivity in clinical settings suggests that it has direct actions on stress circuitry, which may impact the mental health needs of individuals treated with GAHT. However, studies examining GAHT-associated mental health run the risk of pathologizing GAHTs. Therefore, we propose 2 lines of inquiry to pursue through animal models of mood and stress disorders. The first compares GAHT-treated animals to untreated controls, which may identify the direct action of GAHT on mood and stress-related brain regions. The second examines the mental health outcomes using animal models of mood and stress disorder by comparing GAHT-treated animals differentially exposed to an additional variable. Gender-based discrimination and perception of the contemporary geopolitical climate are related to elevated biomarkers of allostatic load in transgender populations. Such factors can be conceived as chronic psychosocial stressors; as such, particular focus should be given to rodent models of chronic psychosocial stress.
They're using the minority stress model again. And yet, despite allegedly being victims of the worst genocide ever, trans people still display higher rates of narcissism and BPD than other populations. Very strange behaviour, we should study it sometime.
Metabolism
Although steroidal hormones and their effects on general metabolism and physiology are historically well-studied, much remains to be studied about GAHT and its long-term outcomes on growth, overall metabolism, and bone health.
Very encouraging: 'we don't know the long terms effects of this, but we will relentlessly support it because we care more about our identity group than anyone else.'
Both estrogens and androgens are thought to regulate feeding behaviors, homeostatic control of thermoregulation, and overall body mass. However, as few studies have examined the effects of E-GAHT and T-GAHT on long-term body composition and growth, we propose preclinical studies to understand how varying regimens of GAHT lead to changes in body weight and the localization of fat accumulation before and after GAHT.
We already have some. Transwomen get fat, transmen gain some muscle and then lose it and get fat, and they still retain their sex based fat disposition. Nature is truly a TERF.
These studies would allow for further tailoring of GAHT regimens to increase satisfactory transition outcomes in TNG populations. Additionally, bone health is thought to be regulated in part by circulating steroidal hormones. Age-dependent bone loss is partially attributed to a dysregulation of gonadal steroids. To address this, we propose longitudinal studies that examine the effects of GAHT on bone health in older TNG individuals and the maintenance of bone growth in young and middle-aged TNG individuals.
And when they get the results they don't like, they'll flush it down the memory hole. Good to see they're coming to the same conclusions as the researchers over at WPATH.
Cancer
While much of our focus has been on neurobiology, our models can be easily applied to other endocrine-sensitive physiological and pathophysiological processes, such as cancer. While much has been written about health disparities in the TNG community in the context of cancer, the influence of GAHT on the prevalence of or risk for endocrine cancers is understudied.
Furthermore, the mechanisms underlying these effects can only be postulated due to the lack of preclinical studies in animal and cellular models. Questions that can be addressed by the proposed models include both short-term and long-term treatment with both E-GAHT and T-GAHT in young adult and aged rodents, activation of cellular processes by both treatment types on ER/PR-positive breast cancer cells, the influence of E-GAHT on prostate cancers, and the long-term effects of pubertal delay on endocrine cancers, including intestinal and reproductive cancers.
So they don't know and admit they're running on a gambit with this. They don't care because muh trans rights comes first.
Conclusions
We must recognize that animal GAHT models are limited in their ability to fully study the uniquely human experience of gender-affirming treatments. However, these models can improve our knowledge of how GAHTs influence physiological and neurological processes. It is imperative to understand that GAHT and the social stressors discussed could have reciprocal influences on their actions and should be individually and synergistically studied. There remain significant barriers to healthcare and to STEM careers for TNG people, which are amplified by current political decisions. As such, studies using the proposed preclinical models of GAHT must incorporate collaborations with TNG community members, either in the lab or through community outreach.
As transgender, nonbinary, and gender diverse identities are increasingly common, the prevalence of binary classifications significantly hinders meaningful research, particularly when applied to the human condition.
As mentioned ITT, Sun and colleagues don't have any meaningful solutions aside from 'do all these batteries of tests to prove something isn't binary when it will clearly come down to being binary.' To them, variations with a sex are variations OF sex, and that attributes within A clearly cannot remain within A and so on and so forth.
The TNG community has identified GAHT research priorities for GAHT [8] to ensure study outcomes and interpretations that align with TNG needs and experiences. Our proposed preclinical GAHT mouse models can create beneficial relationships between science/healthcare and the TNG community, but only when appropriately applied and with direct involvement of the TNG community.
Oh, I'm very pleased. Surely they'll get all these neat result and not burn them once they don't get what they want, right? Here is a second paper on the 'gender binary cycle'. It mostly complains of gender norms so I'll post relevant topics here.
Gender ideology is defined as ‘individuals’ level of support for a division of paid work and family responsibilities that is based on the notion of separate spheres' [9, p. 87]. The beliefs associated with gender ideology reflect the endorsement (or lack thereof) of a binary separation of family versus work responsibilities along gender lines, and the acceptance of the gender hierarchy resulting from it. For example, research on gender ideology has asked respondents to report whether they agree or disagree with statements about separate, and gendered, responsibilities of women and men (e.g. ‘A man's job is to earn money; a woman's job is to look after the home and family’; [10]); and about justification of men's privilege (e.g. ‘It is more important for a wife to help her husband's career than to have one herself’; [11]). To the extent that support for such items is high, we refer to the gender ideology as non-egalitarian.
I'm sure it'll stick to inane bullshit like this, right? No, it gets worse.
There are differences between women and men in many life domains. The lay theories that people hold regarding the sources of these differences fall into two main categories. According to the first, gender differences are a result of the different way people think about and act towards women and men—a socio-cultural theory/explanation. This explanation is consistent with accounts that view gender ‘as an emergent feature of social situations’ rather than a property of individuals [24, p. 126]. According to the socio-cultural explanation, girls and boys, and later on men and women, are being treated differently by others in a way that creates and reinforces gender differences. Examples of such treatment are teachers who expect boys to be better than girls at maths (e.g. [25]), parents who expect their children to avoid toys that ‘belong’ to the other gender (e.g. [26]) and media portrayals that routinely underscore women's sexuality [27].
Notice genetics is never mentioned. Our non human primate cousins act in similar manners, even when they don't have a concept of gender: males are more aggressive, females tend to be more nurturing (and even like playing with dolls). So this is just your typical gender studies paper.
Another way people understand gender differences, which we term a biological-essentialist theory/explanation, is to view them as stemming from biological differences between men and women. According to this explanation, owing to their different biological make-up, men and women have distinct ‘essences’ and thus are predisposed to differ mentally and behaviourally. At the core of this explanation are the genetic and hormonal differences between females and males, viewed as the determining factors of masculinity and femininity [28–31]. Such a biological-essentialist lay theory considers differences between women and men as predetermined and immutable, and views gender as a binary, such that men and women are viewed as different ‘kinds’.
Ah, there it is. The Blank Slate view of 'genes don't matter unless I want them to.' It's like the authors are shocked at this revelation; indeed, they act further shocked when normies agree with those claims:
A recent poll conducted among a nationally representative sample of 4573 adults in the USA [34] found that the majority of respondents agree that men and women ‘are basically different’ on domains related to expression of emotions, parenting style, interests and abilities. The majority of men further indicated that the differences are mostly based on biology (61% indicated biological differences explain why men and women have different strengths in the workplace, and 58% believed biology accounts for gender differences in parenting). The majority of women viewed gender differences as based on societal expectations, though 39% believed biology explains gender differences in parenting and 35% believed biological differences explain gender differences in workplace-relevant strengths.
It is true, men and women are different. But the authors take great umbrage with this, and go on to say math abilities in men vs women are not due to genetics, but sexist teachers:
Demonstrating downstream consequences of such effects, women who were provided with a biological-essentialist account of gender differences in maths (i.e. men perform better owing to genes on the Y chromosome), performed worse on a maths test than women provided with a socio-cultural explanation (i.e. that teachers have biased expectations favouring men; [37]).
Men occupy both tail ends of the bell curve, meaning they are more retarded and more are to be found in the high brilliance section. This does not mean women are stupid.
Not to worry, their solution is just to have people read theory:
For example, greater belief in the deterministic role of biology in human development was associated with more sexist beliefs (e.g. believing that progressive gender policies are unnecessary; [42]; see also [43]) and with opposition to transgender people's rights [44]. Gender essentialism also predicted greater support for gender discriminatory practices and greater perceived fairness of gender inequality [45]. These findings were corroborated by experimental evidence. People who were randomly assigned to read a biological-essentialist view of gender (versus a social–cultural view) were less likely to support rights of women and of transgender people [46]. Similarly, reading theories that provide a biological-essentialist view of gender differences increased people's acceptance of gender inequality [47]. A recent study further showed that exposure to a biological explanation of gender differences (versus a social constructionist explanation or no explanation) increased endorsement of essentialist views which led to decreased recognition of gender discrimination [48].
On differences between males and females regarding hormones:
In contrast with popular beliefs, endocrinology research reveals that humans do not possess one of two sets (‘female’ or ‘male’) of sex-related hormones. Rather, hormones that are considered ‘female’ (oestrogen and progesterone) and those considered ‘male’ (e.g. testosterone) are present in both men and women as they are produced by both ovaries and testes as well as by additional tissues that are present in all bodies (for a review, see [49]).
Yes, we know. We also know men produce far more testosterone than women and women produce more estrogen than men. You also cannot argue this while demanding that trans people get 'gender affirming hormones' that associate with the sex you say they don't.
In fact, other than during pregnancy and ovulation, men and women do not differ on average in their levels of oestradiol and progesterone [50,51].
The paper they are referencing is about women on oral contraceptives. The testosterone levels in men and women differ immensely, and you can see it in any paper discussing physiology. Another case of authors not reading the papers they cite.
Although testosterone levels are higher on average in men than women, the difference is smaller than widely believed, does not exist at all stages of life and the distributions of testosterone levels of men and women show considerable overlap [52].
The paper they are referencing has a graph on page 7 showing the overlap. They are nowhere near equal.
Moreover, the levels of sex-related hormones vary widely within individuals, changing across the lifespan as well as in response to internal and external conditions, including gendered behaviours [53,54]. For example, sexual thoughts increase testosterone levels in women [55] and nurturing parenting behaviours decrease testosterone in men [56]. Thus, gender differences in levels of sex-related hormones do not conform to a fixed and binary conceptualization [53,57].
That doesn't mean anything. Women having higher testosterone does not make them men, nor does it mean their T levels are on their level. This is a tired old argument that needs the Old Yeller treatment.
There is a bit on human brains that is accurate; while there is no 'male' or 'female' brain per se, they do exhibit certain differences that you can say which one is male or female. Troons love using the brain argument so it is nice to see it get spat in their faces (again).
They complain about gendered language:
Gender is routinely used as a label and as a sorting dimension. By gender-based labelling, we refer to the marking of an individual as a girl or boy, as a woman or a man. Language is central for labelling. People constantly use gender labels in everyday language (‘girls’ or ‘boys’, ‘men’ or ‘women’), often when unnecessary (e.g. teachers who greet their classrooms with ‘Good morning, boys and girls’ rather than ‘Good morning, students’; see [70]). Gendered labels are also used in specific domains such as occupations (e.g. actress, or soundman) and are, in some languages, routinely used to describe inanimate objects (e.g. a fork is male and a spoon is female in Hebrew; see [72]). Gender labelling is enacted not only through language. For example, throughout history, gender-differentiated dress was legally mandated in many public settings, including schools and workplaces [73], and norms continue to dictate that men and women differ in their dress and use of accessories.
For example, studies reveal that essentialist accounts of social categories, including the perception that differences between groups are biologically innate, are more common than extrinsic accounts [86]. Thus, a child might conclude that a peer who acts in a certain way must have been born that way, because no alternative explanations are salient (see [87]).
The kid would be right assuming it is in the child's genes to act that way. Over 80%, in fact.
We're the same but also different but don't say that we are different because that's bigotry:
The second additional path indicates that a non-egalitarian gender ideology can drive a biological-essentialist view of gender differences (dashed line on the left side of the model in figure 1). A biological-essentialist view of gender can be recruited by people who endorse a non-egalitarian gender ideology in order to provide justification and validity to their ideological stance. The belief that differences between men and women are inherent, meaningful and inevitable renders role-separation and power disparities logical and justified [41]. In support of this feedback loop, research shows that the more people are motivated to sustain group-based hierarchy, the more likely they are to endorse essentialist views of gender [45].
Early portrays of women described them not only as biologically distinct from men, but also as inferior on almost every aspect of human functioning [92]. The notion that males' brains are designed to facilitate processes that are fundamentally different than those facilitated by females’ brains still prevails, and many studies are devoted to detecting sex differences in brain structure and function. The results of such studies are often interpreted, in both scientific and popular contexts (e.g. press releases, traditional news media), through the binary framework—the differences are overemphasized (in terms of their size and significance) and assumed to add up within individuals to create two types of humans [62,94,95].
You being mad won't stop the research from being done.
While today scientists would not go on to claim that women are inferior to men, their portrayal of sex differences in the human brain often aligns with gender stereotypes. For example, a large study of connectivity in the human brain concluded: ‘Overall, the results suggest that male brains are structured to facilitate connectivity between perception and coordinated action, whereas female brains are designed to facilitate communication between analytical and intuitive processing modes' [96, p.823]. This claim was made even though only several dozen connections, of the over 9000 assessed, showed moderate sex/gender differences (Cohen's d ∼ 0.3; [97]), and the authors did not test whether the differences add up to two types of connectivity patterns. As reviewed earlier, a later study revealed that this is not the case, as most brains possess unique mosaics of connections, some with the strength more common in women and others with the strength more common in men [58].
Nice little contradiction there. Not that many would notice.
Gotta change it as the base level, yo:
The second point of intervention is challenging the biological-essentialist perspective, either by refuting its claims that gender differences are immutable and add up to two kinds or by providing an alternative, non-essentialist explanation, to gender differences. As described above, even a short text that provides adults with a social account of gender differences can reduce the use of gender stereotypes and promote a more egalitarian outlook on gender roles and relations.
The same approach can be harnessed for dealing with gender differences that are assumed to be innate. For example, if boys are assumed to lack in empathy or to be aggressive as a result of exposure to hormones in utero, then appropriate social measures (e.g. educational training) should be taken to increase their empathic and inhibitory abilities, as would have been done if their empathic deficit or aggressive tendencies were attributed to a contextual factor (e.g. maltreatment on part of parents). That this is not the approach taken in relation to biological explanations of gender differences is yet another testimony to the tight relations between these explanations and gender ideology. The alternative approach we suggest can be facilitated by raising awareness to the tendency to celebrate, rather than challenge, gender differences, and to the costs of such tendency: the perpetuation of gender inequality and the costs to people's fulfilment of their full potential [98].
While much of our focus has been on neurobiology, our models can be easily applied to other endocrine-sensitive physiological and pathophysiological processes, such as cancer. While much has been written about health disparities in the TNG community in the context of cancer, the influence of GAHT on the prevalence of or risk for endocrine cancers is understudied.
The idea that the cancer risks of HRT are understudied is actually kind of funny. There have been plenty of studies of the risk of cancer in postmenopausal woman taking HRT, and the results weren't promising.
Doctors used to prescribe HRT for older women willy-nilly until a big study came out in 2002 about all the risks of using HRT long-term. Now the prescribing guidelines are much more strict and usage rates have tanked.
The same scientists also found that HRT increased the chance of dementia.
In a subgroup of more than 4500 women aged 65 or older, an additional 23 cases of dementia in 10,000 women per year were reported among women on combined HRT, as compared to placebo (45 vs 22). As well, combined HRT did not prevent mild cognitive impairment among women who used it and there was a small increased risk of cognitive decline in the combined HRT group.
Regarding the trans breastfeeding thing, there have been multiple studies written on how troon turbo tits are 'histologically' no different from natal women's breasts, and one of the authors is none other than Zil Goldstein, a troon scientist who wrote one case report of trans women 'lactating'. Keep that in mind while you read this. Paper here.
Don't use women, because that excludes trans people you fucking bigot:
Due to stigma and discrimination, transgender individuals have suffered from lack of access to competent medical care [3, 4]. Given the growing desire among health-care professionals to improve access for the transgender community, it is critical for those in the medical community to develop methods for delivering culturally sensitive care in a welcoming environment [5]. Intake forms should allow the patient to self-identify gender, their preferred name, pronoun, and information about gender affirming medical or surgical treatment. This will allow for more complete and accurate information to be entered into standard data fields in medical records thus facilitating delivery of culturally sensitive care and allowing providers to address health care concerns specific to this population of patients which might otherwise be overlooked. Centers that embrace diversity should avoid gender-specific signage (e.g., Women’s Imaging Center). Bathroom facilities should be gender neutral. Privacy may be ensured by providing private changing rooms or allowing the patient to change in the exam room.
No same-sex care for you, ladies - er, uterus owners. The troons have spoken.
However, there are some neat little tidbits in this study. Observe:
Breast development secondary to a physiologic estrogen surge in natal girls has been categorized into five Tanner stages of pubertal development [8]. Transgender women experience muted Tanner stages. There is an initial development of a subareolar breast bud at 3–6 months followed by further enlargement and development of the breast. Maximal breast growth is realized at 2–3 years in our experience. Figure 1 shows heterogeneous breast tissue in a mammogram from a transgender woman treated with cross-sex hormones. Breast size and tissue composition following estrogen treatment varies for each individual. [9•] Transgender women are unlikely to reach Tanner stage 5 [6]. The degree of breast development seems to be independent of type and dose of hormone treatment [9•]. Adding progestins to estrogen does not appear to alter breast size [9•]. Approximately 60% of trans women seek breast augmentation surgery regardless of the type of estrogen used for feminization [9•, 10]. Augmentation performed by established surgical standards in the U.S. employs silicone or saline implant in pre-pectoral or retro-pectoral location. While illegal in the U.S., some individuals may have had free injections of a number of substances such as free liquid silicone for purposes of augmentation.
AKA they get tiny tits. A -cups, if you will. Stunted development. Here are the breasts of a 60 year old granny tranny who was on estrogen for 10 years:
Pooners can't even catch a break. Raising their T levels also raises their estradiol levels:
Transgender males taking testosterone will demonstrate serum testosterone levels in the mid to normal male range.
Wanna know who called this out? Zachary Antolak/Zinnia Jones, of all people. Basically, transmen have the T levels of the Try Guys...or 60 year old males.
In our personal experience, serum estradiol levels may be maintained in post-menopausal female reference range. Some studies have shown estradiol levels above normal male levels in 71% of transgender men at 6 months of treatment [11]. The potential for elevated estrogen has been hypothesized to reflect peripheral aromatization of circulating testosterone [12].
Even after all that work, they still can't get rid of female steroidal hormones. Poor things.
A mildly elevated ratio of estrogen to progesterone may normally occur in cisgender males during infancy, adolescence and advanced age [14]. This causes variable degrees of proliferation of ductal epithelium which is visualized radiographically as dense tissue centered behind and extending from the nipple referred to as gynecomastia [15]. Males with prostate cancer treated with androgen deprivation develop heterogeneously dense breast tissue referred to as diffuse gynecomastia. This correlates heterogeneously dense tissue correlates histologically with moderate acinar and lobular development [16]. The histologic effect of high levels of estrogen utilized for transition from male to female, unlike gynecomastia, includes development of ducts, lobules and acini histologically identical to cisgender women. Pseudolactational changes have also been described [16]. Figure 2 shows an example of lobule formation and pseudolactational changes in the breast biopsy from a transgender woman. We have also observed lobular development similar to a pre-pubertal breast in the setting of estrogen treatment of transgender females [17].
So, we have learned:
- transwomen get small breasts
- they get breasts similar to those of pre-pubertal girls
- Somehow, their breast tissue is exactly like ours. Figures below.
This is what troons are basing their information on: their years of going on E gives them the same ducts as natal women.
As for transmen:
Histologic changes due to progesterone or androgen given in the setting of female to male transition have been inconsistent between studies. Slagter’s group looked at histology from 23 trans men treated with injectable testosterone and observed reduced glandular tissue and increased fibrous connective tissue similar to involutional changes observed in post-menopausal women [18]. However, fibrocystic lesions such as cysts, adenosis and duct and lobular hyperplasia found in post-menopausal women were rarely observed in transgender male breast tissue [18]. There are also immunohistochemical differences in the breast tissue of transgender men [19]. Increased fibrous stroma and lobular atrophy have been observed in transgender men receiving long-term testosterone [19]. In another study, only microcalcifications and no other significant changes in breast histology and immunochemistry were noted in mastectomy specimens from 29 transgender men on long-term androgens [20].
Testosterone is pretty nasty from the sounds of it.
Finally, the largest study of mastectomy specimens from 100 transgender males—who were of average age 28 and received androgens for 2–9 years prior to surgery—showed markedly reduced glandular tissue and proliferation of fibrous stroma in 93% of cases [21]. These investigators observed fibrocystic lesions in 34 cases and 2 fibroadenomas. Of interest, there were no cases of atypical hyperplasia, in situ carcinoma or features of gynecomastia. [21]
Cross-sex hormone treatment for transgender women causes development of ductal epithelium and lobules which vary in distribution and density between individuals. The same breast pathology that occurs in natal women should be expected in transgender women. There are reports of benign entities such as fibroadenomas [22, 23], lipomas and angiolipoma [24] as well as malignancies including a malignant phyllodes tumor [25] imaged in transgender women treated with cross hormone therapy [26].
A Belgian series assessed 50 transgender women who were at least 6 months post-sex reassignment surgery with screening mammography and ultrasound [27]. In this series, 94% of transgender female patients were on estrogen therapy; however, the duration of hormone treatment was not recorded. Of these 50 patients, 60% were judged to have over 25% dense tissue. There was a significant correlation between degree of breast density on mammography and ultrasound. A single fibroadenoma, several cysts, and two lipomas were detected by ultrasound. Imaging features of these benign lesions were identical to those in cisgender women. Figure 3 shows a group of indeterminate calcifications found on a screening mammogram which underwent biopsy which yielded fibrocystic changes in our practice.
Figures below. This was of a 57 year old troon who was on estrogen for over twenty years.
Another figure, from another troon:
In our experience, immature lobules similar to those found in adolescent breast tissue were noted in a transgender women at age 65 who had been taking estrogen for 13 years [17]. Therefore, it is theoretically possible that breast tissue may remain immature and sensitive to ionizing radiation in transgender women who start hormone treatment as adults. Further study is needed to validate this hypothesis and may influence future recommendations for age at which to start with breast ultrasound verses mammography in this population.
So they don't get mature female breasts. They get breasts pre-teen girls get. But they are just like us.
As with cisgender patients, breast implants are imaged with standard oblique and craniocaudal views and Eklund displaced views. Breast augmentation by direct injection of particles such as silicone, mineral oil, liquid paraffin, or petrolatum jelly presents a special challenge for imaging. This material migrates in the fat and muscle resulting in masses termed sclerosing lipogranulomas [29–32]. Breast lumps, inflammation, pain and physical disfiguration cause individuals to seek medical care. Fibrosis and granulomas obscure normal tissue on mammography and ultrasound. On mammography these free particle injections present as numerous diffuse round and irregular high-density masses which represent fibrotic granulomas. Figure 5 shows palpable silicone granulomata which vary in size imaged by mammography, ultrasound and MRI. Free silicone may also create large fibrotic masses in the retroglandular fat and pectoralis muscle which mimic malignancy and obscure breast tissue as displayed in Fig. 6 [33]. Contrast enhanced breast MRI is the preferred mean for detecting cancer in these patient with free particle injections. On breast MRI the granulomas are non-enhancing circumscribed T2 high signal with absent signal on T1-weighted fat-suppressed images.
Here is the photo. This one was from a 60 year old troon:
And this one from a 57-year-old. The silicone breast implants kept getting in the way.
On hormones and breast cancer risk:
The relationship of altered androgen and estrogen on breast cancer risk is poorly understood. The risk for breast cancer due to exogenous hormones prescribed for transgender individuals is informed by studies of estrogen and androgens in the general population. Use of relatively short-term combined exogenous estrogen and progesterone in post-menopausal cisgender women was associated with increased breast cancer incidence; however, exogenous estrogen alone was not associated with increased risk, according to data from the Women’s Health Initiative [34]. According to an analysis of nine prospective studies of endogenous hormone levels and breast cancer risk in post-menopausal women, breast cancer is associated with elevated levels of circulating estrogen and androgens in post-menopausal women [35–37]. Based on these studies, it is reasonable to hypothesize that breast cancer risk might be elevated for transgender women treated with hormone replacement therapy.
Conversely, though there are abundant androgen receptors in normal breast tissue and androgen receptors are also frequently expressed in breast cancers, there is no evidence for increased breast cancer incidence in women with hyperandrogenism such as polycystic ovary syndrome, or in transgender men receiving testosterone treatment [21].
Stupid point to make as they admitted earlier in the paper most transmen get mastectomies done. No breast tissue, no cancer risk.
This is somewhat counterintuitive, as there is aromatization of androgens to estrogen in the peripheral blood of transgender men on testosterone, which may result in maintenance of estradiol levels [12]. Breast cancer risk in transgender women is potentially reduced due to a relatively shorter duration of lifetime exposure to estrogen compared to cisgender women. It has been demonstrated that early menarche and late menopause are associated with increased risk of breast cancer in cisgender women [38].
It's almost as if their bodies are trying to tell them something.
Although there are no population-based studies that document incidence of breast cancer in transgender patients, in a study from the Netherlands following a cohort of 2,307 transgender patients, breast cancer was diagnosed in one transgender male and in two transgender females. The authors calculated that these findings translated into a cancer rate of 4.1 per 100,000 life years in transgender females and 5.9 per 100,000 transgender males, similar to the approximately 1.2 in 100,000 cisgender males and significantly lower than the rate of 170 in 100,000 in cisgender females [40]. These authors concluded that the risk for breast cancer in male to female patients is similar to natal male sex and breast cancer risk in female to male patients also is quite low.
It's almost as if, despite all that estrogen, their bodies are still male.
A descriptive study performed in the U.S. published in 2015 measured breast cancer incidence in a cohort of 5,135 transgender veterans [41]. Chart review revealed three cancers in transgender women and seven cancers in transgender men yielding a rate of 20 per 100,000 years. The three transgender women all had advanced disease which the authors use as evidence for the need for screening using standard guidelines. One of the seven transgender men had undergone mastectomy including chest contouring. These data may be unreliable because terminology was not uniform, there was a lack of follow-up outside the VA system, and no specific data on hormone use were provided.
> They don't get cancer
> They get cancer based on their sex
> We don't know if hormones do anything
> Estrogen is said to prevent cancer
> ???
For trans men:
It appears that risk for breast cancer in trans men on testosterone treatment is low and it has been hypothesized that testosterone treatment reduces risk [42•]. There are five case reports of breast cancer in transgender men all of whom were treated with testosterone. Of these five cases, four of the cancers were ER positive and three were PR negative. Invasive duct cancers that were ER + PR- were found in two trans men who had not had mastectomy, one at age 27 and the second at age 53 [43]. The three additional invasive duct cancers were residual breast tissue in trans men following subcutaneous mastectomy. One was in the nipple and the second was areolar diagnosed at age 33 following 13 years of hormone treatment and at age 42 following 1 ½ years on hormone treatment, respectively [44, 45]. The third case is a 41 year old who developed invasive duct carcinoma in the left lower outer quadrant after 15 years on hormone treatment [46].
How many trans people get mammograms? I'll let the paper show you:
There are limited conflicting observations of utilization of mammography by transgender individuals. Using phone surveys conducted in 2014 by the Center for Disease Control’s Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System including 220 respondents, 54.5% of transgender females and 64.3% of transgender male respondents had undergone mammography within the past year [49]. This study lacked information about hormone and surgical treatment and involved a small number of participants. A small retrospective study which compared mammography utilization between cisgender women, transgender women on at least 5 years of hormone treatment, and preoperative transgender men at a single urban health center, observed decreased utilization of mammography by both transgender men and women [50].
Huh, guess it's not all that bigoted. They're still getting their lopsided titties checked.
Might as well sum it up with this:
How hormone treatment might alter risk in the setting of a deleterious gene mutation remains to be determined. It has been suggested that transgender women with a BRCA gene mutation should use the same screening guidelines as cisgender mutation carriers [54].
According to their own chart, TW have a lower risk of it than 'cis men', which comes out lower than 0.1%. In sum, they tried to say transwomen have the same breasts as natal females yet forgot to mention they have the same lobules as PRE-PUBERTAL GIRLS. Not grown women. Careful wording, there. Let's go for round two of troon breastfeeding extraordinaire. This paper goes in detail about trans lactation, for both transmen and transwomen. From the abstract:
Pregnancy and lactation involve two aspects that are socially and culturally associated with women. However, there are a few biological differences between male and female breast tissue. Lactation and pregnancy are viable processes that do not depend on sex.
Even for the latter, it is only necessary to have an organ capable of gestation. Ways to favor mammogenesis and lactogenesis in trans* women have been established. There are protocols to promote lactation in trans* women, usually used for adoptive mothers or those whose children have been born through gestational surrogacy. Chestfeeding a baby could be the cause of feelings as diverse as gender dysphoria in the case of trans* men, and euphoria and affirmation of femininity in trans* women.
I want you to pay attention to this wording. For transwomen, they get to keep 'breastfeeding' because it affirms them, but for transmen, it MUST be chestfeeding because it reminds them of what they are - female - and they cannot stand it. Now we have a paper perfectly illustrating this.
How many trans people are there? The paper gives us a clue:
In this sense, the American Psychiatric Association (APA), in its fifth edition of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Illnesses (DSM), establishes a prevalence figure of trans* individuals ranging from 0.003% in trans* women up to 0.014% in trans* men [7]. However, these figures seem to be underestimated, given that not all trans* individuals request healthcare, hormonal therapies, or undergo sexual reassignment surgeries.
This tiny minority is demanding that you change your language for them. This teeny-tiny minority.
The bit on transmen getting pregnant has more references, which will have to be added in a later post as I will exceed the word limit here. But this is what they write:
Some trans* men who keep their uterus are able to become pregnant and give birth [8,10,11,12]. Some of them decide to chestfeed their babies and require specialized support to do so [4,13]. Although organizations and health professionals have become more aware of reproductive health and lactation in trans* individuals in recent years [14], there is a scarce number of studies addressing this topic [14,15,16,17,18], as well as scarce amount of scientific literature that describes the experiences of pregnancy in trans* men [3,4,10,18,19,20,21,22], especially insufficient in the field of nursing [16].
Only a couple hundred of these 'sea horse dads' pop out a kid. Yet language still needs to change because they get offended. Remember that.
Unlike trans* men, trans* women do not have a reproductive system that allows for gestation and, therefore, cannot become pregnant. However, they are capable of developing breast tissue that is histologically and radiologically indistinguishable from that of cisgender women [1].
The paper they are referencing will be discussed in another post, as it is 28 pages. It is also written by Goldstein, the troon scientist. However, I can give you what it says on troon breast development:
The current data suggest that transgender women do not reach full breast maturity and may have smaller breasts on average compared with cisgender women. There is one careful study of breast development in transgender women done with transgender women following the European protocol of estrogens along with the adjunctive progestin, cyproterone acetate, used as the anti-androgen. In the European study, it was typical for trans women to plateau at Tanner III (24).
This is in line with their previous paper: they are 'just like us', but they are not.
Breast volume can be determined via a number of volumetric measurement techniques. One proxy for breast volume is bra cup size. Bra cup size is calculated by finding the difference between the circumference of the chest under the breasts (“band size”) and the circumference over the fullest parts of the breasts, usually over the nipples (A.K.A “bust size”). The number of inches of difference corresponds with the alphabetic cup size. For example, a difference of 1 inch corresponds to an A cup, a difference of 2 inches corresponds to a B cup. The average breast size in cisgender women in the United States is conventionally defined as 36C, although depending on the population studied and the methodology of the data collection, this figure varies significantly. For example, one survey of 103 volunteers at a U.S. university reported that the most common bra size is a 34B. However, this study was comprised solely of Caucasian participants and excluded pregnant and breastfeeding women (52). By comparison, according to one European study of 229 transgender women starting cross-sex hormones, only 21 of the women were described as having a bra size of A cup or larger (24). The study followed participants for one year. Breast development did not vary based on weight, type of estrogen used, or hormone levels achieved. Notably, the majority of breast growth was described as occurring in the first six months of treatment. By contrast, cisgender women spend 4-5 years progressing from Tanner Stage II to Tanner Stage V. To date there have not been studies of breast volume in transgender women lasting 4 or 5 years, thus the full potential for breast growth in transgender women has not been established.
Transwomen do not go through Tanner Stage V for breast development. They are admitting their breasts do not reach the maturity of natal females. Don't let that distract you from them being 'histologically the same'.
Anyways, back to the OG paper.
Thus, they can also chestfeed effectively [23,24]. As assisted reproduction techniques advance, cisgender women are no longer the only ones involved in pregnancy, childbirth, and lactation [17].
Although both men and women have breast tissue, the word “breast” is more associated with the female sex, which will generate discomfort in the trans* men who feel more comfortable with the term “chestfeeding” than with the term “nursing” [13]. On the other hand, for trans* women, breast development is an important marker of physical feminization [1,2].
It makes transwomen excited and gives them euphoria (or lady boners), but for transmen it gives them a tantrum, dood. Be kind.
Even though trans* individuals have experienced significant progress in their social acceptance, stigma and discrimination persist [10], including in health services [3,25,26]. In this regard, nurses need more training on how to support trans* patients during pregnancy and lactation [17]. There is an important gap between what is taught in professional schools, what is taught in graduate programs at university, and the real needs of trans* individuals [10,27].
AKA change your rules so trans people don't neck themselves.
Here is the graph for their broad themes:
Some of the individuals who need obstetric care are not ciswomen [8]. In those trans* men who have undergone surgeries during their transition, such as hysterectomy, metaoidioplasty, or phalloplasty, pregnancy is not a possibility [21].
Then they don't need to seek out 'female healthcare'. You don't get to have your cake and eat it, too.
Trevor MacDonald found that the majority of trans* men choose to undergo a surgical process of chest masculinization, which differs from a conventional mastectomy or breast reduction in that the goal is to create a male breast, maintaining part of the mammary gland [13], which will also allow them to chestfeed in the future if they wish. In this sense, the “periareolar” approach, in which the nipples remain intact, seems to show better outcomes in future lactations, unlike the “double incision” approach, which includes nipple grafts, reduces sensitivity, and does not always keep the milk ducts intact [13].
So they keep the part of themselves that is considered uniquely female (breastfeeding, that is) and still do not want to be referred to as female. But at least they admit top surgery ain't all rainbows.
Not all trans* men who have give birth want to chestfeed. Sometimes, this fact results from mental health issues and feelings of dysphoria [7]. It is always a personal decision. Others, however, wish to chestfeed, choosing to avoid chest masculinization surgery in order to be able to produce enough milk [13].
Regarding hormone treatment, testosterone is the key hormone in masculinization therapy. Testosterone can be administered by intramuscular injections, transdermal patches, topical gels, or implants [28,29]. Hormone therapy with testosterone will cause a series of consequences, such as: amenorrhea, cessation of ovulation, and the appearance of typically cismale secondary characteristics such as low-pitched voice, facial hair growth, and the pattern of androgenic baldness [13].
Their frog-like voices definitely clock them as 'cis male'. Same pitch as a teenage boy.
Hormone therapy should be discontinued if gestation is desired in order to recover ovulation cycles, which takes between eight and twelve months to resume after testosterone withdrawal [30,31,32,33]. If pregnancy is achieved, testosterone treatment should be abandoned, given that it has teratogenic effects on the fetus [5,10,13,34], and it is safe to conceive a few months after cessation given its high metabolic rate [13].
Well at least they admit what we all knew. Thank you, trans positive paper, for admitting the obvious!
This interruption of hormonalization during pregnancy will reverse the main changes already established, such as: increased breast tissue, redistribute fat in the hips, reduce facial hair [4], and decrease bone density [5]. It also causes intense mood swings such as increased gender dysphoria [18,21]. It can have a great damaging impact [21], especially in men who have not undergone chest masculinization due to the development of breast tissue [4,13] and feelings of anxiety, depression, isolation, and loneliness [10,13,21,22].
Then don't get pregnant, dood. It was your choice, after all.
A strategy for the management of dysphoria generated by breast augmentation involves the use of a bandage or a compressive elastic garment to flatten the breasts, which is known as a “chest binder” or “binder.” However, its use can cause glandular tissue involvement of the breast [13]. In addition to the binder, many trans* men resort to coping strategies in view of the visibility of their pregnancy, such as: impersonating cisgender women; going unnoticed as an obese cisgender man; or becoming visible as a trans* pregnant man [8,11,35].
The results obtained also indicated that there was a higher proportion of caesarean sections by choice [18], mainly in those trans* men who had previously taken hormones and considered vaginal delivery as a disturbing experience [22]. This fact poses a challenge for specialized obstetric care, given that there is a significant lack of knowledge about the perinatal approach. [10,21,34].
So: trans men will willingly get fucked in their vagina, but not want to give birth vaginally. They'll opt for a major abdominal surgery because of muh dysphoria. The hoops these retards go through.
After giving birth by vaginal delivery or caesarean section, the restoration of hormonal therapy with testosterone can interfere with the hormones necessary for the production of milk [13], such as prolactin, insulin, and hydrocortisone, although the use of testosterone seems to be safe because it is not significantly excreted through milk and does not have an effect on the newborn [10]. Many trans* men do not want to chestfeed because they recognize that chestfeeding is a turning point. They describe it as an anguishing experience and even claim to be the pinnacle of gender dysphoria [21], which leads them to suppress chestfeeding [10]. Others, however, link chestfeeding to a natural form of attachment and strengthening of the bond with their babies [4].
Then why the fuck did you get pregnant? Obviously it was such a validating experience to get railed in your 'male pussy' that lead to pregnancy. If you don't want to breastfeed, DON'T GET PREGNANT.
Now, back to transwomen. some interesting tidbits:
Sonnenblick et al. found that approximately 60% of trans* women resorted to breast augmentation regardless of whether they were receiving hormonal treatment or not. An essential element in the transition of trans* women is the development of breast tissue [2], which is an important marker of physical feminization [1,2].
They go with the 'our breasts are just like yours' schtick:
Whereas testosterone is administered in trans* men, estrogen is the leading hormone in the case of trans* women [1,2]. After the start of hormonal therapy, there is an initial development between the first three to six months starting with a small subareolar breast buds, followed by increased breast tissue development and increased volume [2]. Breast development is not comparable to that of cisgender women, maintaining an immature chest and smaller breasts [36]. The maximum growth will not be achieved until the second year [2], showing no relationship with doses and type of treatments used [37]. In addition, estrogenic therapy is usually combined with medications commonly called “anti-androgens,” which are used to reduce the effects of testosterone, such as: spironolactone [1,5,28,29], cyproterone acetate, and GnRH [5].
They do not reach the same growth as us, nor the same size, nor the same maturity, but please do tell us how we are 100% the same.
The breast tissue that develops, using the standard estrogen hormone, is radiographically [2] and histologically [38] indistinguishable from that of any cisgender woman. Tissue changes derived from a therapy with high estrogen levels during the transition, unlike what happens in gynecomastia, leads to the development of galactophores ducts, lobes, and alveoli. This way, the glandular volume increases, which also turn out to be identical to that of cisgender women [2].
I would like to remind you that the previous papers referenced ADMIT they get the same breasts as PREPUBERTAL GIRLS. THEY ARE NOT MATURE. This is what they are using to argue that they can breastfeed.
They give a passing reference to domperidone:
The United States government agency responsible for the regulation of food, medicines, cosmetics, medical devices, biological products, and blood products (Food and Drug Administration—FDA), considers the current use of domperidone an effective galactagogue, posing unknown risks to infants [46]. In this sense, the study conducted by Reisman and Goldstein in 2018 indicated the effectiveness of domperidone in a trans* woman in achieving milk secretion together with the use of a breast pump [23].
Note that none of these case reports ever actually studied the breast milk itself and whether it was healthy.
In this sense, there are investigations that have pointed out stigmatization, violence, oppression, and discrimination against this population that faces unique and specific barriers when receiving healthcare [5,17], such as misinformation about the short- and long-term effects of testosterone in the reproductive organs, the ease of conception, pregnancy, mental health, and the lactation process [8].
What misinformation? You casually admitted fetuses shouldn't be exposed to it. What else is there?
Trans people are frustrated because they have to teach medical professionals about their bodies:
Regarding the barriers to healthcare perceived by trans* individuals, a study conducted by Grant et al. revealed that 19% of trans* individuals had been denied healthcare because of their gender identity, 50% had to teach their health providers about trans* health issues, and 28% had delayed the search for healthcare due to fear of being discriminated against [49].
I am reminded of that post of that one TERF who said 1/4 of her course involved transwomen. Not menopause, not actual female health issues - male people. Because bigotry.
Transmen on how offended they get over being called a mother:
Regarding lactation, the qualitative study conducted by MacDonald et al. described the experiences of trans* men with chestfeeding and the expressions that health professionals used regularly. The authors observed the power of language, the appropriate use of pronouns according to gender, and how words such as “her,” “mother,” “mum,” “breasts,” or “chestfeeding” were annoying and inappropriate. They even observed how touching patients’ chests without their consent caused intense anguish. In that study, the trans* individuals themselves explained and gave guidelines that should be followed in order to make the healthcare provided trans*-competent [4].
Transmen: get fucked in their 'male vaginas' and get pregnant
Also transmen: get upset when they are called 'mum' when they give birth
HECKIN MANLY, DOOD
Oh, but it gets worse:
Chestfeeding is a challenge for these men because sucking becomes difficult for the babies due to the lack of tissue and skin; however, a supplement and the “sandwich technique” can be used to shape the chest [13]. It is worth mentioning that sucking is especially difficult if the individuals have undergone the double-incision technique [4].
Trans* men who have not undergone chest masculinization and choose to chestfeed may occasionally wear a chest bandage to handle their dysphoria once milk production is regular and provided that no pressure is exerted on a specific part of the chest. Nevertheless, these individuals should be well informed about the possible risks of the bandage [13]. It is common that these men experience congestion and signs of mastitis, especially after wearing bandages for many years, because there may be glandular tissue involvement [4,13]. The chestfeeding position is essential, because, for example, in a reclined position, the breast tissue stretches, thus making sucking difficult for the baby. The “rugby hold” and the “crossover hold” are the recommended chestfeeding positions [13].
These guidelines include: (a) health professionals should pay special attention to the language used; (b) if mistakes are made, the health professionals should apologize and correct those mistakes; (c) patients should be asked about the way they want their body parts to be referred to; (d) health professionals should ask patients’ consent to touch their chests; and (e) health professionals should be updated on available resources. In addition, these authors also mentioned aspects to be avoided, such as: (a) asking questions not directly related to the postpartum situation, i.e., future plans, hormonalization, parenting expectations, etc.; (b) presupposing the identity and gender of the individuals; (c) increasing the number of professionals in the consultations, because patients may be induced to perceive themselves as morbid situations. This way, health professionals will be able to focus on the needs of the patients as new parents who need support for breastfeeding or chestfeeding, not for their appearance as trans* individuals [17].
Even according to the APA, despite the attempt to reduce the stigmatizing effect by changing its diagnostic label to the current “Gender dysphoria” in its DSM-V, transsexuality continues to be considered a mental pathology [7].
Under this pathologizing framework, it is not surprising that in most of the consulted bibliography, the barriers that trans* individuals encountered in society also existed in health services. Thus, this fact includes stigmatization, discrimination, invisibility, vexatious and degrading treatment, and inequity in the care provided by health care professionals and institutions [3,5,10,17,25,26].
Many studies have indicated that due to heteronormativity, trans* individuals are excluded from parental and maternal models [35,55,56]. Therefore, trans* parents have a unique position that challenges the binary social construction [57] in which health systems have inherently assigned the fertilizing body and lactation to the female gender [58].
You mean female sex? Because genders don't get pregnant. Female bodies do, thanks to male sperm.
Hormone therapy has great impact among trans* individuals. In the induction and establishment of breastfeeding, this impact is even greater in the case of trans* women, given that, in order to be able to breastfeed, they need to complement estrogen therapy with other drugs, such as: spironolactone [1,5], cyproterone acetate, and GnRH agonists [5], whereas trans* men do not require supplementation with medication because with the normal course of pregnancy they already secrete the rest of hormones in a physiological way, thus normally developing breast tissue. The majority of breastfeeding induction protocols for trans* women follow the guidelines of the Newman–Golfarb induction protocol for adoptive mothers or those with children born through surrogacy [42].
I thought transwomen had the same breast tissue? How come they need all those drugs to perform the thing pooners can do no problem?
In the case of trans* men, the decision on the alternatives of chest masculinization surgery is of vital importance, because the possibility of chestfeeding in the future—for which the maintenance of glandular tissue is necessary—should be taken into consideration. In this sense, periareolar breast surgery offers better outcomes. [13]. The surgeons who perform these interventions should be updated to offer adequate advice on the choice and indication of surgical techniques, and subsequent follow-up.
Again, can't latch if there are no nips. Can't breastfeed if there is no tissue.
The present study highlights the need of conducting studies in health sciences, especially relating to the care and advice provided by nurses to trans* individuals who are pregnant and want to chestfeed or breastfeed or, both men and women respectively.
The stigma and social discrimination suffered by trans* men when they become pregnant and chestfeed has increased. This stigma and rejection is no different in the health field, which is a barrier to healthcare.
Many of the difficulties that trans* individuals face with respect to access to healthcare and the care received result from the culture of heteronormativity, binarism, and predominant cisexuality. There is a lack of training in current health sciences curricula in this regard. If health professionals are trained on sexual and gender diversity, the use of inclusive language, and the multiple possibilities of pregnancy and lactation among trans* individuals, healthcare would be improved and adequate treatments would be prescribed.
Same. Also if anybody has well done studies about dysphoria and dysphoria during/after transition, the health risks of SRS and HRT and the outcomes... I'd love to read a bit on that.
This is why I find the scientific studies in regards to trans brains BS.Not one study has ever attempted to explain how a TIFs brain is similar to a "cis man's".If these TIFs had male brains then pregnancy and child birth would make them extremely dysphoric and suicidal.I can't think of one "cis man" who wants to get pregnant and experience child birth.TIFs will straight up insist child birth and pregnancy have nothing to do with their gender identity.Ok then what is a man's brain then?Since biological sex has no connection to your man brain then what are you so dysphoric about then?Why do you want to chop off your breasts as if that part of your anatomy reminds you that you're a woman but your genitals, uterus, ova,etc some how dont?
This is why I find the scientific studies in regards to trans brains BS.Not one study has ever attempted to explain how a TIFs brain is similar to a "cis man's"
From Tamar Reisman and Zil Goldstein, the two troons responsible for the trans breast milk studies, I bring you the full paper on troon tit development. Buckle up.
To date, transgender women have been shown to be able to develop breast tissue radiographically and histologically indistinguishable from cisgender women with standard feminizing hormone regimens (3). This is intuitive. Pubertal breast development is a hormone mediated process, and thus has the potential to be recreated with exogenous hormone administration. Indeed, transgender women have recently been proven capable of functional lactation (4).
And who wrote this seminal paper? They did, of course! Gotta give a nod for their wee case reports.
But, there's a twist:
For optimal health monitoring, there is interest in understanding how transgender breast tissue may be either similar or dissimilar to that of cisgender women, with notable implications for breast cancer surveillance.
They just said it was the same. Why would there be any differences?
In utero, the fetus is exposed to high levels of maternal estrogen. Falling maternal estrogen after birth triggers the infant hypothalamic-pituitary-gonadal axis in both boys and girls, leading to estrogen and testosterone surges respectively. This phenomenon is known as “minipuberty,” and causes the highest levels of reproductive hormones seen until puberty. It is also suspected that falling maternal estradiol levels are responsible for triggering neonatal prolactin secretion and lactation, colloquially referred to as “witch’s milk.” (10) It is unclear what, if any, effect on future breast growth and development early hormonal exposure may have. Ultimately most early breast tissue regresses, leaving behind small ductal structures in stroma in both boys and girls. Breast tissue is largely quiescent from age two until puberty (11-13).
Males get a burst of testosterone, females estrogen. They don't get equal bursts of both.
Breast development in transgender women has been observed to go through stages that can be labeled according the Tanner stage system (22). Tanner stages are observable on imaging, and correspond to that of cisgender adolescents (3). Typically, at 3-6 months of hormone treatment, a subareolar breast bud develops. Further breast growth occurs over the next 2-3 years. The breast tissue that develops as the result of standard feminizing regimens in transgender women has been noted to be radiographically indistinguishable from that of cisgender women (3). Histologically, breast tissue among transgender women after exposure to hormones is indistinguishable from that of cisgender women according to one report, but differs significantly from the breast tissue seen in cisgender men with gynecomastia (27).
This is most often attributed to a decreased testosterone to estrogen ratio. Gynecomastia correlates histologically with ductal epithelium proliferation, and can be visualized radiographically (2. Gynecomastia can also be seen in cisgender men treated for prostate cancer with androgen deprivation therapy (27). Histologically, these individuals are seen to have acinar and lobular expansion. Both of these are different from the tissue of hormone treated transgender women who have duct, lobule and acini development identical to that of cisgender women, along with pseudolactational changes
The current data suggest that transgender women do not reach full breast maturity and may have smaller breasts on average compared with cisgender women. There is one careful study of breast development in transgender women done with transgender women following the European protocol of estrogens along with the adjunctive progestin, cyproterone acetate, used as the anti-androgen. In the European study, it was typical for trans women to plateau at Tanner III (24).
That's right: they get the tits of prepubertal girls. Not postpubertal - because they don't grow anymore. Despite that, histologically the same!
The average breast size in cisgender women in the United States is conventionally defined as 36C, although depending on the population studied and the methodology of the data collection, this figure varies significantly. For example, one survey of 103 volunteers at a U.S. university reported that the most common bra size is a 34B. However, this study was comprised solely of Caucasian participants and excluded pregnant and breastfeeding women (52). By comparison, according to one European study of 229 transgender women starting cross-sex hormones, only 21 of the women were described as having a bra size of A cup or larger (24). The study followed participants for one year. Breast development did not vary based on weight, type of estrogen used, or hormone levels achieved. Notably, the majority of breast growth was described as occurring in the first six months of treatment. By contrast, cisgender women spend 4-5 years progressing from Tanner Stage II to Tanner Stage V. To date there have not been studies of breast volume in transgender women lasting 4 or 5 years, thus the full potential for breast growth in transgender women has not been established.
Itty bitty titty committee. Not to worry, a solution was offered:
There is a great deal of interest in optimizing the feminizing hormone regimen to maximize final breast size. For example, it has been suggested that the use of progestogens in feminizing hormone regimens can help achieve this goal (54). Other suggested breast maximizing changes to the hormone regimen include slow upward titration of estrogen dose and avoidance of spironolactone (22, 25, 35, 36, 53-55). While provocative, no studies confirm any of these approaches. By contrast, in an 18-month study using a flexible ruler to measure breast size, investigators reported that there was no significant difference in breast size among women treated with conjugated estrogens versus ethinyl estradiol along with no significant difference among women treated with progestational agents relative to those were treated with estrogen alone (60). Interestingly, the authors observed that maximum breast growth was observed at two years.
It has been suggested that transgender women are more likely to have a “conically” shaped breast. Perhaps the reference is to tuberous breast deformity with features that include a constricted breast base, reduced breast parenchyma, and restricted skin envelope causing a herniation of the breast parenchyma into the areola. Tuberous deformity is noted in both cis men and women including in cisgender men with gynecomastia. Two studies report that transgender women may have an increased incidence of tuberous deformity (58, 59); however, it is not clear that the incidence differs from that for cisgender women.
Any troon you see with big tits have gotten them done. Authors admit as such:
Strikingly, in some series, 60% of transgender women seek breast augmentation (22, 24, 25) with many more expressing the desire to undergo this procedure (24). These findings highlight the importance many women place on achieving breasts of a certain size.
During pregnancy and parturition, a number of hormonal changes occur to facilitate lactation. Progesterone induces increased ductal branching and maturation, estradiol increases the glandular volume of breast tissue and prompts pituitary differentiation of lactotrophs, prolactin stimulates breast milk production, and oxytocin promotes milk expression (5,6). The ability to induce non-puerperal functional lactation have previously been documented. Regimens to induce non-puerperal functional lactation have used the following framework: 1. Increased estradiol and progesterone dosing to mimic pregnancy, 2. Use of a galactogogue to increase prolactin levels, 3. Use of a breast pump with speculation that it would increase prolactin and oxytocin levels and 4. Subsequent reduction in estradiol and progesterone levels, with the intention of mimicking delivery (4).
Yeah just a teeny tiny problem: they don't produce the same hormone regimen an actual female does, including the placental hormone. That's why breastmilk is specifically tailored to the needs of the infant. They pumped a male full of hormones to mimic pregnancy and thought that was OK to do.
A recent case report documented the potential for induced functional lactation in transgender women (4). That a transgender woman was able to breastfeed supports the underlying similarities of breast tissue in cisgender and transgender women. However, more data are needed to determine what among the noted framework might be considered essential for induced lactation.
> Never get to Tanner Stage V of breast development
> Get on a hormone regimen to mimic pregnancy
> Feed your infant nipple pus that has never been adequately tested
> insist we are the exact same
On them getting breast cancer:
Transgender women have been reported to have significantly lower rates of breast cancer than cisgender women. A Dutch study reported a rate of breast cancer in transgender women of 4.1 per 100,000 life years based on two breast cancer diagnoses among 2,307 transgender women (29). Similarly, a study of 5,135 transgender US veterans identified three cases of breast cancer among transgender women and seven cases among transgender men, substantially lower than a cisgender woman’s risk of developing breast cancer in her lifetime, which is approximately 1:8 (63). One study of ten breast cancers in transgender women reported that the median age of diagnosis was 48 years with the majority ER negative and the background lobular development in non-cancerous tissue similar to that of an adolescent girl (31). There was also one reported case of ductal carcinoma in situ (31).
They do not have fully developed breasts, but insist they can breastfeed.
Given the observed structural and histologic similarities between cisgender and transgender breasts it might be expected that the rate of breast cancer would be similar in the two groups. There are several proposed explanations for the relatively low risk of breast cancer noted in transgender women.
• Low reported cancer rates may be due to underreporting or erroneous classification of sex/gender in registries (32)
• The transgender women studied have had shorter lifetime exposure to estrogen (34).
• Other differences between cis and transgender women may be protective. For example, typical trans feminine hormone regimens do not contain progesterone; exogenous estrogen plus progesterone has been associated with increased breast cancer incidence compared to estrogen alone (33).
Huh, thought estrogen was PROTECTIVE, and they are just like us, so...
On testosterone and breast development:
Very little is known about the effects of testosterone on mammary tissue. Hypogonadism is a noted cause of gynecomastia in cisgender men (43). Some suggest that testosterone exposure may have antiproliferative and apoptotic effects (47). Specifically, in vitro studies have demonstrated that some androgens (testosterone and dihydrotestosterone) can inhibit the growth of cancer cells (47). In addition, a single study that histologically examined mammary tissue from transgender men who had taken testosterone prior to mastectomy showed a reduction in glandular tissue and an increase in fibrous connective tissue (46). Others have worried that higher levels of testosterone (and other androgens) might increase breast cancer risk (44). Transgender women are exposed to high testosterone levels both during “minipuberty” and puberty. Further, transgender women often experience imperfect medical suppression of testosterone which could lead to elevated levels of both testosterone and estrogen (4. Accurate data examining the development of transgender women’s breast tissue in the absence of testosterone may require careful study limited to transgender women who have undergone gonadectomy.
Nature really is a TERF, it doesn't even want to affirm their womanhood during infancy!
Just like us, but denser breast tissue:
Although data are few, there is some evidence that transgender woman may have denser breast tissue compared to their cisgender peers, and thus may benefit from preferential ultrasound screening. In a Belgian series using both ultrasound and mammogram modalities in 50 transgender women, 60% were judged to have over 25% dense tissue (40). The dose and duration of hormone administration in these patients was not recorded. There is a report of a single 65-year old transgender woman taking estrogen for 13 years who was reported to have immature lobules similar to those found in adolescent breast tissue (41). Future studies characterizing breast tissue in transgender women can help guide decision making regarding age for screening, and choice for imaging modality.
Going back to their tits being similar to ours before puberty, again.
Epidemiological studies have been reassuring that breast implants are not associated with breast cancer; however, there are reports of an increase in anaplastic large cell lymphoma among patients with some implants (64). Breast Implant Associated Anaplastic Large Cell Lymphoma (BIA-ALCL) is a type of non-Hodgkin’s T-cell lymphoma. However, the number or reported cases remains small, and the exact number of cases worldwide has not been established.
The earliest breast development is hormone independent, and indistinguishable between the sexes. The breast growth and development that occurs at puberty for cisgender women is hormone dependent, and can be induced in transgender women with exogenous hormone treatment. More data are needed to understand the possibility to optimize breast growth in transgender women, and to ensure proper cancer screening.
The sources are actually really revealing. You go to page 26, you find something from 1998 saying bone development in MTFs plateaus at Tanner Stage 2 or 3. Here are some screenshots:
Damn, even their own pro-troon scientists have to lay down the blackpill. That's rough. This one is about hormonal and metabolic changes in troons. It was an unpublished manuscript at the time.
In a recent systematic review of 29 studies, the prevalence of transgender subjects ranged from 6 per 100,000 to 521 per 100,000 persons for male-to-female [MtF] individuals and from 2.5 per 100,000 to 256 per 100,000 for female-to-male [FtM] individuals, based on transgender-related diagnoses or self-identification, respectively [3]. Because of prejudice and the fear of being disclosed, many patients with gender dysphoria do not seek medical care but often resort to self-medication to affirm the sex with which they self-identify [4].
No reference ranges for hormonal and metabolic parameters in transgender persons are currently available. It is not reasonable to expect transgender patients to have values that would be normal for the sex with which they identify, and consequently lab reports may be misinterpreted [4]. For this reason, laboratories have been advised to empirically determine reference ranges specifically for both MtF and FtM subjects on CSHT [4].
Data are summarized in Table 1. Compared with baseline, systolic blood pressure but not diastolic blood pressure decreased significantly while on CSHT (119±9.9 vs. 112.9±5.8 mmHg, P= 0.04). As expected, total testosterone dropped to within the normal female range (20.5±8.0 nmol/L [592.2±231.2 ng/dl] at baseline vs. 1.1±1.2 nmol/L [32.8±35.9 ng/dl] on CSHT, P< 0.0001), while 17-β estradiol and SHBG levels rose significantly and trendwise significantly, respectively (108.3±48.5 pmol/L [29.5±13.2 pg/ml] at baseline vs. 237.9±177.7 pmol/L [64.8±48.4 pg/ml] on CSHT, P= 0.002, and 29.3±12.4 nmol/L at baseline vs. 44.7±26.4 nmol/L on CSHT, P= 0.06 (Table 1). Stepwise linear regression confirmed that the 17-β estradiol level was positively correlated with SHBG level (β= 0.391, r= 0.544, P= 0.030). According to the Endocrine Society Guidelines for the treatment of transsexual persons, 1 undertreatment (i.e. total testosterone >1.9 nmol/L [55 ng/dl]) occurred in 6 of the 21 patients (28.6%), while overtreatment (i.e. 17-β estradiol >734.2 pmol/L [200 pg/ml]) occurred in one patient (4.8%). In cases of undertreatment, the daily dose of estradiol valerate was increased, while in the overtreated patient it was decreased. CSHT also caused a significant reduction in red blood cell count (RBC), hemoglobin and hematocrit. Indeed, these values on CSHT were similar to those found at baseline in FtM patients (Table 2).
Administration of testosterone every three weeks was associated with higher serum total testosterone levels compared with administration every four weeks (17.2±6.7 nmol/L [496.4±193.2 ng/dl] vs. 12.3±9.8 nmol/L [354±282.9 ng/dl], P= 0.02). Because of the aromatization of testosterone to 17-β estradiol, the latter increased, although not significantly (Table 2). In line with the Endocrine Society Guidelines [1], the interval between injections of testosterone was increased in two patients because serum testosterone was >24.3 nmo/L (700 ng/dl). As expected from the effects of testosterone on erythropoiesis, RBC and hemoglobin and hematocrit levels rose significantly from baseline (4.8±0.4 vs. 4.4±0.4 million/mm3 , P= 0.01; 147±10 g/L [14.7±1.0 g/dl] vs. 135±8.0 g/L [13.5±0.8 g/dl], P= 0.006; and 43.5±3.1 vs. 40±2.9 %, P= 0.01, respectively)
This was a retrospective study of transgender patients consecutively referred to our unit. Concerning MtF patients, we found that CSHT was associated with a 6 mmHg decrease in systolic blood pressure, which appeared to be more related to the reduction in serum testosterone rather than to the increase in 17-β estradiol. Diastolic blood pressure also decreased, but nonsignificantly. The ability of CSHT to lower systolic and diastolic blood pressure has been already reported in MtF patients [2,9,13]. The reduction in blood pressure may result from CSHT per se, from the decrease 9 of hematocrit (see below), or from the reduced stress due to progression of feminization [13]
Adding further complexity to this issue, progestagens, which are sometimes used by transgender women to improve breast development, can increase the water and salt retention induced by CSHT.
We found also that CSHT caused a significant reduction of erythropoiesis, with the hematocrit dropping by 5% while on CSHT compared with baseline. This reduction is similar to that found in a recent multicenter study of 53 transgender women [9]. Erythropoiesis appears to be affected mainly by the reduction in serum testosterone rather than by the increase in serum 17-β estradiol, as the former, but not the latter, correlated positively with RBC, hemoglobin and hematocrit. While 17-β estradiol enhances iron absorption in the intestine, it inhibits hypoxiainduced erythropoietin synthesis in the kidney [18]. The mechanisms underlying the stimulating effect of testosterone on erythropoiesis are not completely known, and are mediated by mechanisms other than erythropoietin [19]. Indeed, testosterone enanthate does not significantly affect erythropoietin levels [19] and, consistently, the majority of patients with testosterone-induced erythrocytosis have low erythropoietin levels [20]. In this regard, in our study, even if hematocrit increased significantly in FtM patients while they were on testosterone, only in one patient was it over 50%
An Austrian retrospective study found that total cholesterol, HDL-c and triglycerides tended to increase over time in 89 MtF patients treated with oral or transdermal estrogen plus cyproterone acetate or finasteride [22]. Also, compared with transdermal estradiol, oral estradiol was associated with higher triglyceride and lower HDL-c levels [22]. However, in two recent studies [13,23] transgender women treated with 17-β estradiol (orally, transdermally or intramuscularly) plus spironolactone showed an increase in HDL-c only [23] or HDL-c and triglycerides levels [13]. In line with these studies, another two studies found that HDL-c levels incrased, while LDL-c levels decreased [12,24]. Interestingly, the authors showed also a decrease in LDL particle size [12]. Finally, a multicenter study showed that total cholesterol, HDL-c, LDL-c and trygliceride levels were significantly lower than at baseline after 12 months of 50 mg/d cyproterone acetate plus 4 mg/d estradiol valerate or 100 mcg/24 hours transdermal 17-β estradiol [9].
In FtM patients, CSHT led to a significant increase in creatinine levels, which were higher than those found in cis-gender males (Tables 1 and 2), and which correlated positively in turn with serum testosterone levels. This effect, also reported by other authors [9,23,26], is not unexpected, since testosterone treatment increases muscle mass in both cis-gender and transgender subjects [1,5]. In a murine model, sex hormones have opposite effects on renal damage, since testosterone induces while estradiol inhibits podocyte damage [27]. However, testosterone protects against renal ischemia reperfusion injury in rats per se and not via conversion to estradiol [28], and low levels of testosterone are associated with reduced estimated glomerular filtration rates in men aged 40-80 years [29].
The Endocrine Society advises a check on liver enzymes at least once per year in both MtF and FtM patients because CSHT may exacerbate liver dysfunction [1]. Initially, liver dysfunction was considered a major concern in MtF patients, as a retrospective Dutch study of 425 transgender women reported the rate of liver enzyme abnormalities to be 15% [30]. A more recent longitudinal study showed that the majority of these abnormalities are transient (< 12 months) and affect on average 5% of treated MtF patients [9].
There are three major limitations to the present study. First, the sample size is somewhat small, but this was constrained by the number of transgender patients referred to our unit (~ 7 per year). Second, because this was a retrospective study with an average follow-up 30 months, we cannot infer how the parameters might vary over longer periods. Third, we did not consider the impact of CSHT on cardio-metabolic parameters other than blood pressure and body mass index. Our data confirm the findings of previous studies on the hormonal and metabolic impact of CSHT in transgender people. The main changes concerned blood pressure, hemogram and lipid profile in MtF patients, and hemogram, glycemia, creatinine and liver enzymes in FtM patients. However, despite the changes, values still appeared to be generally within the normal range.
But it's no big deal. Swear. Ever wonder what happens to pooner's ovaries during testosterone therapy? This paper gives a clue.
Female-to-male (FtM) transition remains a specific clinical indication for testosterone administration. There is a limited number of studies dealing with long-term treatments and the effect of androgens on their targets (mainly breast and uterus) and the knowledge in this field is scarce and, sometimes, contradictory. Theoretically, after androgen treatment, the uterine changes of postmenopausal women may be different from those occurring in women taking long-term androgen therapy during reproductive age [3]. A point that still needs to be adequately addressed regards the uterine changes induced by long-term testosterone administration during the reproductive age. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to determine the type of histological and steroid receptor changes in the endometrium and myometrium of FtM transgender individuals undergoing long term testosterone therapy, prior to hysterectomy during the process of sexual reassignment surgery.
Testosterone concentrations were measured every 3 months for the 1st year and then every 6 months in subsequent years. The goal was to maintain serum testosterone concentration < 55 ng/dL.
If you're thinking, 'that's it?' that's all they get? You'd be correct. Sometimes pooners might get into the 'male range', but that belongs to the range of 60 year old men. They rarely get 1000 ng/dL.
Amenorrhea occurred 8-12 months after starting of the therapy and had a mean duration of 21.8 ± 8.7 months before the hysterectomy. Free testosterone and total testosterone concentrations progressively increased from basal value, reaching a peak at 6 months (p < 0.001) after testosterone administration. Concentrations of 17- b estradiol were reduced after testosterone administration due to inhibition of folliculogenesis, reaching postmenopausal concentrations at 6 months after initiation of androgen therapy (116.5 ± 62.3 pg/mL vs. 51.6 ± 18.6 pg/mL, respectively). Basal hematocrit values were significantly lower than those after 6 months of androgen treatment as well after year of therapy (39.9 ± 2.3 vs. 43.7 ± 2.8 vs. 44.6 ± 2.2, respectively; p ¼ 0.01 for all comparisons). FerrimaneGallwey score progressively increased from pretreatment value until 1 year after surgery (4.5 ± 3.7 vs. 9.9 ± 4.2 vs. 14.2 ± 4.4 vs. 16.6 ± 8.65 vs. 17.3 ± 8.96, respectively; p < 0.001 for all comparisons). Remarkably, FerrimaneGallwey score increased from 4.5 ± 3.7 before treatment to 16.6 ± 8.65 soon after the surgery. As a result of the direct inhibition exercised by androgens on its synthesis in the liver, SHBG concentrations underwent a slight but significant decrease (43.8 ± 4.6 vs. 21.9 ± 5.6; p ¼ 0.001; Table 1).
Endometrial histology revealed the presence of active endometrium in 10 cases and secretive endometrium in two cases. Multifollicular ovaries were observed in all cases of active endometrium, while corpus luteum was present in the two cases of secretory endometrium. Fibroids or hypertrophic myometrium has been observed in 58% (7/12) of the patients.
The immunohistochemical study of steroid receptors showed, in the endometrial epithelial cells, a sustained mean expression of estrogen receptors (54%) and progesterone receptors (59%), while the intensity of androgen receptors expression was modest (24%) and ki67 (8%) expression very low. In the stroma, the mean expression of estrogen and progesterone receptors was lower if compared to the epithelium (40%), while that of androgen receptors was higher, reaching a mean value of 39%. Lastly, myometrium had the lowest expression of estrogen receptors (17%), but the highest expression of progesterone (68%) and androgen receptors (69%). Figure 1 shows the different expression of the androgen receptors in the endometrium (epithelium and stroma) and the myometrium. Ki67 expression was constantly low in all uterine compartments, declining from 8% in endometrial epithelium to 2% in myometrium (Table 3), as shown in Figure 2
The long-term effect of testosterone on human endometrium is a subject for debate [9]. Randomized controlled trials have been conducted and suggest that in women with surgical and natural menopause, testosterone alone [10] or in combination with estradiol [11e13] has a positive impact on sexual function and is well tolerated [9,14]. In vitro studies have suggested that high dose androgen treatment could induce endometrial atrophy, through an inhibitory effect on cells proliferation, as observed with an administration of intramuscular injection of 100 mg Testoviron Depot/10 days for at least 1 year [15].
By contrast, recent studies have found that long-term testosterone administration can induce a proliferative effect on the endometrium in young women during reproductive age, as a consequence of aromatization of androgens into estrogens.
Their lady bits are telling them different. Have some more pics:
Futterweit and Deligdisch [23] studied 19 transsexual FtM individuals undergoing long-term treatment with a low dose of testosterone enanthate (parenteral 400 mg every 3e4 weeks) confirming the possibility of an endometrial stimulatory effect of testosterone administered during reproductive age. In that study, 63.2% of FtM had a proliferative endometrium, 18% had an endometrial glandular cystic mild degree hyperplasia, and 36.8% had an inactive endometrium [23], suggesting an aromatization of testosterone executed by an endometrial aromatase.
However, normal human endometrium is not able to aromatize androgens to estrogen [24,25], since aromatase is not expressed in physiological conditions by epithelial and stromal endometrial cells [26,27], but only by cancerous endometrial cells [20]. In order to better understand the relationship between androgen administration and endometrial biology during reproductive age, we examined uterine histological patterns, receptor status, and Ki67 in endometrial epithelium and stroma, and myometrium, after hysterectomy performed during sex reassignment surgery in young women who desire FtM reassignment. Histologically, we have found a high rate of active endometrium, sometimes evolving in secretory patterns, without cases of atrophic endometrial involution.
Our findings suggest that high dose of testosterone administered for a long period of time in young women does not induce an endometrial atrophy, but could be associated with a persistent although modest proliferative activity, according to the presence of multiple follicular cysts in both ovaries resembling, from a functional point of view, the picture of polycystic ovaries. This is confirmed in the literature through the association of serum testosterone levels and polycystic ovaries according to antral follicle count and ovarian volume in reproductive-aged women [28]. By contrast, the finding of sporadic secretory endometrium, observed in 16.6% of the cases, in the presence of corpus luteum during prolonged androgen treatment, is in agreement with a minimal proliferative activity [29] and the unexpected high level of expression of estrogen and progesterone receptors (Figures 3 and 4).
A large body of literature suggests an atrophic effect of long term androgen therapy in FtM individuals treated with testosterone. Our data provide evidence that testosterone administration produces active endometrial and myometrial changes in women of reproductive age undergoing androgen therapy during the course of the process leading to sex reassignment surgery. This can be the result of the association of ovarian changes, responsible for a continuous, albeit at low concentration, estrogen production, leading to androgen upregulation in the myometrial expression of androgen receptors. The correlation between long-term androgen administration and uterine histological and receptor changes is scarce, and more studies are needed in order to establish the effect of such therapy on uterine tissues. This is extremely important in those patients requiring cross-sex hormone therapy for gender dysphoria without sex reassignment surgery, who may deserve surveillance due to the risk of endometrial degenerative changes due the apparent proliferative activity induced by androgen therapy.
85 patients were included in the study. At the time of oophorectomy, the mean age and body mass index (BMI) of the cohort were 30.4 ± 8.4 years and 30.2 ± 7.3 kg/m2, and the average interval from initiation of testosterone to oophorectomy was 36 .3 ± 37.9 months. On examination of ovarian histopathology 49.4% (42) of specimens were found to have follicular/simple cysts, 5.9% (5) were polycystic, and 38.8% (33) had normal pathology. For those specimens with volume documented (n=41), the median volume was 9.6 (range 1.5–82.5) cm3. There was no association between the duration of testosterone therapy or BMI and the presence of cysts on the ovaries.
This study reveals that ovarian pathology remains benign while on testosterone. In general, ovaries in this cohort were within range for reproductive age ovaries and noted to have benign spectrum of pathology including folliculogenesis, and simple cysts. None of the ovaries had pathology which would have required oophorectomy in a reproductive age cisgender female.28,29 A significant inverse correlation was noted between duration of testosterone use and ovarian volume. Additionally, four patients in our cohort had endometriomas, which would be unusual in persons who had complete ovarian suppression, further supporting persistent activity.30 There were no neoplasms noted. Lastly, three of the older patients (37–41) had pathologically atrophic ovaries. While these persons are on the older end of our cohort they are still young to have atrophic ovaries as they are younger than common ages of menopause, and all of them had durations of testosterone use below the mean (12–36 months).31,32
If retained, these ovaries may protect individuals from the effects of hypogonadism on bone and heart if the individual is unable to obtain testosterone therapy for a prolonged period of time without significant feminization .
Based on this cohort, the majority pathologic descriptions of physiologic follicles, simple cysts, and PCAO in this large retrospective cohort suggests both ongoing physiologic activity and no evidence of increased malignant pathology despite long-term exogenous testosterone exposure.
From Tamar Reisman and Zil Goldstein, the two troons responsible for the trans breast milk studies, I bring you the full paper on troon tit development. Buckle up.
I suppose it's possible the actual tissue is similar, after all, it develops from exposure to the same hormone, but nobody who has seen weird ass troon tits trying to migrate from each other so hard they have red shifts would mistake them for real tits.
This was one of the people Birthing Person Jones referenced favourably in her post on how science doesn't back transphobia. Lal Zimman is a pooner, and assistant professor of linguistics at University of California, Santa Barbara. She is responsible for launching 'trans linguistics', and the paper that launched her to fame was one based on ethnographic surveys and pooner voices being fried on T. I am not joking. Here is her Wikipedia page. And the paper itself (locked behind paywall because of course).
Zimman, being the pussy she is (lol) ended up deleting her seminal paper. Luckily, the Wayback Machine saved it. It's 22 pages, but don't worry, I'll only be including the relevant stuff. It can be found here.
...the 2010s have been the decade of transgender publicity, when the well-honed theories of gender and identity trans people had been developing in-community for decades finally began to be recognised more broadly as a matter of social justice.
Language has played an enormously important role in the sea-change the United States is undergoing in terms of its understanding of and orientation toward transgender issues. One of the milestones in this process is the growing interest in trans-inclusive language within linguistic institutions such as mainstream news organisations, medical providers and schools. These issues have become hot topics on college campuses in particular as some universities are investing in trans-inclusive language practices by, for instance, making ‘pronoun pins’ available to students who want to signal whether they should be referred to as she, he, they, or some other pronoun (Associated Press 2016). These changes have not gone unopposed, however, and trans-related language has become a popular topic of critique among conservative commentators (including from inside academia, e.g. Craig 2016), who frame trans-inclusive language as a form of political correctness that imposes the leftist ideology that trans people’s identities should be affirmed and respected. In either case, language is at the centre of public debates over the place of transgender people in the United States. Trans people remain vulnerable to verbal harassment, physical and sexual violence, and discrimination in healthcare, employment and housing, among other injustices, yet there is clearly a growing segment of the cisgender (i.e. non-transgender) population who recognise the importance of language for transgender liberation. Indeed, trans activism is often centred around linguistic reform. One recent success, for instance, is the introduction of the word non-binary for reference to individuals who do not self-identify as either female or male. Similarly, the word cisgender or cis, which has been in wide use within trans communities for well over a decade, has recently entered the general lexicon of a broader (cis) population. With the notion of cisgender identity comes the recognition that cissexism, or cisnormativity – the notion that cisgender identities are ‘natural’, ‘normal’ and ‘good’, while transgender identities are ‘unnatural’, ‘abnormal’ and ‘bad’ – is an organising principle of normative gender systems in the United States (and elsewhere).
This paper came out in 2017, so it is safe to say that things have gotten much worse since then. At least we can put a name to one of the people who successfully got others to say 'man vaginas'.
Beyond the use of overtly hostile language, such as transphobic epithets, there are many subtle ways language enforces cissexism. Among these is the practice of using words like woman and man to refer interchangeably to a person’s physiology (e.g. ‘women’s bodies’), childhood socialisation (e.g. ‘how women are raised’), perceived gender (e.g. ‘women often experience street harassment’) and gender identity (e.g. ‘women may be inclined to have other women as friends’). The difficulty of divesting oneself fully of cisnormative language is a common subject of anxiety for aspiring allies, but linguistic analysis offers tools for understanding the linguistic strategies trans people themselves have developed for subverting cisnormativity and the gender binary. After all, trans people, too, have needed to develop ways of thinking and talking about gender in ways that affirm their own and one another’s identities.
Just a reminder: while they tell you to lose the gendered language, they want it all for themselves. "Breastfeeding" for transwomen, 'chestfeeding' for transmen, etc etc.
A lot of the paper is just your typical gender studies gibberish. Take this paragraph, for example:
One of these is in discussions of sexual assault, in which the word no and other forms of refusal has been treated variably as always meaning ‘no’ or as sometimes meaning ‘yes,’ ‘maybe’ or ‘try harder’ (p. 164). Another is in the terminology used to discuss sexual interactions, such as the choice of the word penetration, which frames the penis as performing an active role in vaginal intercourse, as opposed to options like enclosure, surrounding or engulfing that suggest greater agency on the part of vaginas (p. 165). A final concerns the meaning of new terminology introduced in the process of language reform such as Ms as a title for women that does not invoke marital status or chairperson as an alternative to chair(wo)man. In all of these cases, a central question is who has the power to determine the meaning of politically charged lexical items.
What an odd thing to say. Did they vagina ask for it during rape?
Overtly gendered nouns, such as woman, female, girl and lady or man, male, guy and dude, function in large part to index the gender of the referent, along with other social characteristics. Though relatively small in number, these words are high in frequency; it is unusual for a person not to be gendered if they are to play any kind of significant role in a speaker’s discourse. Where marking gender is the norm, words that can be used to refer to a person of any gender, such as person, human or individual, arguably carry their own gendered implications specifically because they refuse to specify their referent’s gender.
By contrast, an utterance like ‘That woman is a professor’ presupposes the referent is female, and a response of ‘No, she’s not’ will be taken to be a rejection of the idea that the referent is a professor, not a negation of her status as a woman.
No, we're saying the professor is a woman. Because that's her sex. We determined it from, you know, looking at her. That doesn't mean we're judging her; we're making an accurate estimation of her sex.
Correcting presupposed information therefore requires additional interactive work. If utterances that presuppose someone’s gender are both frequent and potentially difficult to correct, then much of the negotiation of gender attribution must be done implicitly, presenting particular challenges to those who are often misgendered (i.e. referred to as a gender they do not identify with).
If you're having trouble understanding this, you are not alone. The Khazar pooner is being deliberately obtuse, as most in her field are.
One thing transgender people share with scholars of language, then, is the recognition that language is one of the primary fronts on which gender is negotiated (see also Bershtling 2014; Edelman 2014; Gratton 2016; Hazenberg 2016; Kulick 1999; Valentine 2003; Zimman 2009, 2014, forthcoming). As Ochs (1992) emphasises, a central feature of indexicality is that it constitutes, rather than reflects, social meaning.
The definition of 'woman' is 'someone who performs femininity':
...of indexicality is that it constitutes, rather than reflects, social meaning. That is, people do not select linguistic forms that index femininity because they are women; rather, they are women because they repeatedly engage in practices that index femininity.
The affirmation of trans identities is thus accomplished – or withheld – through everyday discourse (Speer 2005). In this sense, being trans is not only about expressing one’s gender sartorially or through other forms of material and visual self-presentation, but also about linguistic performativity. Although most transgender people would resist the notion that one is only a woman or man if one is recognised as such by others, it is clear that the lives trans people are able to lead, their safety and their overall wellbeing (Pflum et al. 2015) are all heavily influenced by the recognition, or misrecognition, they experience through others’ language.
That's why they get so enraged when you accurately sex them. Their entire identity is based on you pretending.
On troon's throwing out their biological sex:
One of the most basic principles motivating the strategies I describe below is the strict separation trans people draw between gender identity and the sexed body. In a cissexist cultural context, bodily characteristics like physical size, hair patterns, facial features and body shape are prioritised in the gender attribution process. Yet asserting a self-identified gender that does not correspond to one’s assigned sex requires an overt rejection of this logic. Rather than the body determining gender identity, trans communities generally see an individual’s internal sense of self as a truth that transcends the material self (see also Edelman and Zimman 2014; Zimman 2014; Zimman and Hall 2009). Rather than equating gender with externally defined characteristics – biological or otherwise – self-identification is promoted as the ideal way to determine an individual’s gender identity (see Stanley 2014 on gender self-determination).
The simplest level of trans-inclusive language reform deals with the use of overtly gendered language in the form of gender identity labels (woman, man, trans, non-binary, etc.), kinship terminology (mother/father/parent, sister/brother/sibling, etc.), less frequent direct indexes of gender such as professional roles (waiter/waitress/server, masseuse/masseur/massage therapist, etc.) and pronouns (to be discussed below).
On how trans people totally overthrow stereotypes:
This emphasis on the individual’s internally felt sense of self, rather than adherence to external criteria, undermines any suggestion that trans identification is rooted in gender stereotypes regarding what it means to be a woman or man (e.g. Hausman 1995; Lorber 1994; Shapiro 1992). Instead, self-determination rejects both clinical and social expectations that trans women be normatively feminine and trans men normatively masculine. The notion that the only requirement for membership in a gender category is one’s self-identification with that category deeply destabilises the gender essentialism that has often been attributed to trans people (even as it presents other issues, as Zimman, forthcoming, discusses).
One potential alternative to this cissexist state of affairs would be to develop an alternative set of criteria – for instance, prioritising a person’s style of dressing and presentation as defining characteristics of their gender. To an extent, this does describe norms of interaction in many trans communities, wherein someone wearing a dress is likely to be referred to with feminine language regardless of their physical characteristics.
On them being the sole authorities on what gender is and what language you should use:
However, members of the trans communities where I have worked in recent years almost universally cite gender as determined solely by self-identification. A person who describes herself as a woman is a woman, whether or not she has any of the physical or social characteristics normatively associated with women. While the dominant system for gender attribution enables – even requires – that people make assumptions about one another’s gender identities in the process of assigning gendered language, trans people treat each individual as the ultimate source of authority on their own gender and thus the determiner of what language others should use.
She mentions SNL's Pat and whether people knew Pat was a woman or not:
My students are now too young to recognise this example, but readers may recall Pat, a gender-ambiguous person who was a recurring character on Saturday Night Live in the 1990s. Pat’s gender presentation created deep unease in the other characters they3 interacted with, who would always try desperately to determine how Pat should be gendered without revealing this confusion.
The idea that it is offensive to ask people how they should be gendered is grounded in a model of gender that says a person’s status as a woman or man must always be easily identifiable. To suggest that a person’s gender is not obvious is to suggest that they have failed to enact that gender correctly. By contrast, all trans people have, by definition, experienced a disconnect between how they see themselves and how they are seen by others. Because trans people tend to see gender as a matter of inner self-identification that may or may not be evident to others, it is essentially unremarkable for a trans individual to encounter someone whose gender identification is not evident from their body or style of presentation.
A second area of worry is whether asking trans people about their pronouns singles them out or calls attention to their gender ambiguity or the visibility of their trans status. And this certainly can happen if pronoun checks are not practised consistently. In the classroom example just discussed, a professor who only asks certain students to give their pronouns because they believe those students might be trans has failed to understand that anyone could be trans or have pronouns that are not easily deduced from the outside. This is why trans communities that advocate pronoun checks emphasise the importance of normalising pronoun checks for everyone.
Trans people are just better at language than you, cissy:
Trans people tend to be prolific metalinguistic commentators (Edelman 2014; Hazenberg 2016; Zimman 2016), and trans-affirming language reform asks cisgender people to become more conscious of the ways they use language and why, and to be able to discuss such matters with others. This aspect of trans language reform requires that people fundamentally change how we think about pronouns. Pronoun attribution is usually rapid and automatic, occurring with little or no conscious intervention on the part of the speaker. Trans people’s own linguistic practices, however, increasingly involve bringing pronoun attributions above the level of awareness (Silverstein 1981), putting them in a realm more commonly associated with names than pronouns.
You need to consider the gender identity of random people:
The use of language to gender people is so pervasive that it is often done even when a person’s gender is arguably irrelevant to the discourse. For instance, speakers often refer to brief encounters with strangers by saying things like, ‘The guy who made my coffee today did a terrible job’, or ‘A woman who was just hired at the corporate office is holding a seminar on statistics’. Of course, such details do the work of setting the scene, and at times may be relevant for the interpretation of what is said. However, gender attributions like these also reinforce the idea that a person’s gender can be deduced visually and/or aurally. Furthermore, identifying an unknown café barista as a man or a new employee teaching statistics as a woman may be relevant only because they either adhere to or deviate from gender stereotypes – perhaps the idea that men are not well suited to food preparation or that a woman teaching statistics is remarkable in some way.
At times, the gender neutral option may feel clunky or unnatural, but of course the same argument can be (and has been) made for the choice some feminists make to place female referents first (‘women and men’ rather than ‘men and women’); it was also offered to support the contention that he or she could never take the place of generic he. Of course, the perception of speech as sounding natural, articulate or aesthetically pleasing derives from a long history of socially informed norms of use. In other words, referring to a group of people’s spouses rather than their husbands and wives may sound less elegant precisely because it challenges the history of language use that produces notions like linguistic elegance.
Closely related to the concept of gender neutrality is gender inclusivity. While gender neutrality avoids marking gender at all, gender-inclusive language recognises that there are more than two genders. Most conventional attempts at gender inclusivity reinforce the binary as well, as references to ‘both’ genders are common. For example, an utterance like ‘Both women and men should have access to college-sponsored athletic teams’ could be rephrased more inclusively as, ‘All students should have access to collegesponsored athletic teams.’ Similarly, ‘Whether you have a girl or a boy, be sure to show your child lots of love’ could become ‘Regardless of gender, be sure to show your child lots of love.’ This strategy also problematises second-wave language like the other sex – initially developed as an alternative to the opposite sex – and offers in its place phrasing such as another sex.
The problem that needs to be addressed here, too, is a product of cissexism, and specifically of the assumption that someone’s physiology, gender socialisation experiences, perceived gender and self-identified gender will always align in the expected ways. Words like woman and man or female and male are often used to refer to different aspects of sex and gender, which for trans people may or may not align.
This dumb Jew bitch doesn't think biology plays a role, and that we're all blank pieces of cardboard. Who knew evolution denial came on the heels of troons?
Some examples will be useful to illustrate this problem and how it might be addressed. Each of the following sentences, which are slightly modified versions of real utterances observed by the author, uses the word women to refer to different aspects of gender and sex:
1 Women grow up being taught to accommodate others’ needs.
2 Women face negative assumptions about their professional capabilities.
3 All women need access to cervical cancer screenings.
Zimman has a problem with women using their own words to describe their bodies. She wants them to be gender neutral, but note that no such effort is used for male bodies or language used to describe men.
In example 1, the word women is used in reference to people who were raised in a female gender role. In addition to being an essentialising statement that erases the intersections of gender with race, class, sexuality, age, cultural context and so on, this example also equates the category of woman with the set of people who were assigned to a female gender role at birth.
What is a 'female gender role'? Well, Zimman says it's not based on sex stereotypes, but rather, anyone that identifies as a a woman. So what gender roles are they taking if they are all based on the personal self? Zimman doesn't answer this conundrum. Nor does she understand that we are going off sex, not gender here; sex is observed at birth, not assigned, we can tell what sex the fetus is (indeed, Birthing Person Jones knows the difference as she has an entire video on it).
Such an equation implies that trans women are not truly women because they were not raised as girls and that trans men and others assigned female at birth are women because they were socialised as such.
Yes. Transwomen are male, and transmen are female. Transmen don't inherit male privilege, yet we are told transwomen lose theirs.
Example 2, by contrast, uses the word women to refer primarily to people who are perceived as women. The cultural logic of misogyny does not care or bother to find out whether the target identifies as a woman, so a trans man or non-binary person who is perceived as female by others may be subjected to the same treatment as cisgender and transgender women who are perceived as female.
Why would this be? It's almost as if other males know, and can detect your sex just by looking at you. Once you speak, that's just more evidence of your sex.
To equate this category with ‘women’ is, at best, to erase the fact that some self-identified women do not experience this form of misogyny because they are not perceived as women, and that some men and non-binary individuals do experience it because they are perceived as such. The third example also uses the word women, but in this case is discussing people with a particular body part. These types of examples can be the most difficult for people to deal with because of the tight ideological link between physiology and gender, such that a woman and a person with a cervix are seen as co-extensive categories, save the case of women who once had a cervix but no longer do.
By now you are used to these terms; you see them used everywhere by medical organizations. "Cervix havers" and 'uterus owners', but never 'prostate havers' or 'penis people'. There is a reason for that.
To refer to cervical cancer screening as something that all women need is to define womanhood by the presence or absence of certain reproductive organs.5 Here again, trans men who have cervixes are cast as female, while trans women’s lack of a cervix is used to deny them access to their self-identified gender.
Transwomen do not have a cervix because they are male. Transmen want to be seen as men, and treated as men, so if they want to be treated as men in healthcare, have at it.
Social euphemisms are particularly common in talk about the body, especially where women are concerned (e.g. women’s health in reference to sexual/reproductive health or feminine hygiene in reference to menstruation products). As example 9 will highlight below, trans people tend to take a much more direct approach to talking about somewhat taboo parts of the body.
Of course they do. That's why transmen won't even shower because it involves touching their vagina.
There are two primary strategies for addressing the conflation of different aspects of gender and sex, one of them quite simple and the other a bit more complex. The simpler strategy is to hedge all generalisations about gender. This would allow us to turn examples 1–3 above into utterances such as in examples 4–6:
4 Women often grow up being taught to accommodate others’ needs.
5 Most women face negative assumptions about their professional capabilities.
6 Women typically need access to cervical cancer screenings.
> Sex and gender aren't the same
> You need to stop using the word 'woman' and 'female' because of their connotations to sex and gender.
In addition to being more trans-inclusive, these changes also recognise the variability in cisgender people’s bodies and experiences. After all, not all cisgender women are raised to be accommodating, not all cisgender women are assumed to be professionally incompetent, and not all cisgender women have cervixes. Hedging generalisations about gender and sex is one of the easiest ways for a speaker to make their language use more trans-affirming.
The fact you have to use 'cisgender' in order to include males, who are not women, and then gaslight us into believing our health needs do not matter and can be waved away by gender neutral language is just one reason why I peaked - and you should, too. This was a guide to changing language. Hold these people accountable.
Zimman goes on to deny that sex exists:
While sex refers to a person’s embodiment, which is not a fixed, unidimensional state but rather a set of multidimensional characteristics that can change over time and be understood in a variety of ways, a person’s assigned sex/gender is the category they were placed in at birth, which generally does not change. These categories can be further distinguished from how a person is perceived, or read, by others. This vocabulary would transform examples 1–3 to the utterances in examples 7–9:
7 People assigned female at birth (often) grow up being taught to accommodate others’ needs.
8 (Most) people who are perceived as women face negative assumptions about their professional capabilities.
9 Everyone with a cervix (typically) needs access to cervical cancer screenings.
When they say sex can be 'changed over time', they just mean hormones. That is it. They think genotype can change with their titty skittles or T shots.
Everyone does not have a cervix, because 'everyone' includes males, who do not have a cervix. Only females have them. How can one be assigned female if genitalia isn't concrete, either? Zimman doesn't answer this conundrum, either.
To the uninitiated, these phrases can seem wordy, complex or even amusing (particularly in the case of example 9). Yet each of these statements manages to express normative expectations about gender without delegitimising or erasing trans individuals. They also have the added bonus of being more technically accurate than the sweeping generalisations delivered in examples 1–3.
These are still generalizations, because Zimman assumes that women do not know they are female and that they will accept this erasure with a smile (well, handmaidens do). They are also not technically accurate because most women don't even KNOW where their cervix is. Good luck with ESL speakers. Aren't you a linguist?
They allow for specific recognition that, for instance, cisgender women who do not have cervixes do not need access to cervical cancer screenings. This approach requires a rehauling not only of the lexicon, but of the way people think and talk about gender. It requires more reflection about which aspects of gender really are relevant when we talk about the experiences of women and men. It requires that we become more comfortable talking about body parts rather than using identity-based euphemisms. It requires that we learn to identify when trans people are included in our ideas and when they are not. It requires us to say what we mean, and mean what we say.
> Stop reducing us to our body parts!
> We will reduce you to your body parts because it is more scientifically accurate.
Although transphobia and cissexism may not be eliminated through changes to language alone, identifying cissexist language patterns is a critical step towards dismantling the oppression trans people experience. Furthermore, careful analysis of cissexist language reveals some of the sociocultural barriers trans people face when it comes to gender recognition and validation. And for those who are motivated to reshape their linguistic usage to enhance trans people’s sense of dignity and affirmation, trans-inclusive language reform may require practice, but it requires no special cognitive or linguistic aptitudes. To the extent that cis people have trouble with trans-inclusive language, this trouble should be understood not as a natural limitation, but as a product of a culture in which the ability to talk about trans people respectfully is not seen as an important linguistic skill.
Transgender experience is fundamentally grounded in language, and no account of contemporary trans politics would be complete without attention to the ways gender is constructed through language. As social scientists have long recognised (e.g. Garfinkel 1967), trans people’s lives often reveal the contingent, performative, discursive basis of gender in ways that can be invisible as practised by normatively gendered subjects. But this observation is not simply a theoretical insight; the instability of trans people’s gender identities has a political context, which is the regular and overt delegitimation and stigmatisation of trans identities. Though the threat of physical violence looms large, it is language that serves as the most pervasive ground on which trans identities are delegitimised and transphobic violence is perpetuated. By the same token, it is also the ground on which trans identities can be affirmed, reclaimed and celebrated.
Even the Jew troon cannot provide a concrete definition of trans identity, as evidenced by the footnotes.
MDJ herself admitted that 99% of her patients are female, yet she will upend her entire practice and field because of a few hundred pooners who got knocked up and get enraged over any terms associated with women. Tough life.
Mayo Clinic experts say puberty blockers can lead to withering testicles, fertility problems and even cancer among the trans kids who take them, in the latest study to raise alarm about transgender medicine.
The findings cast doubt on the 'reversibility' of puberty blockers — a key claim of the trans activists who promote the drugs, saying they only 'pause' puberty and buy time for trans kids to make decisions about their gender.
Instead, researchers say puberty blockers hurt the development of testicles and sperm production in ways that are not fully reversible and could affect users' ability to have children when they grow up.
'At the tissue level, we report mild-to-severe sex gland atrophy in puberty blocker-treated children,' the geneticist Nagarajan Kannan and others wrote in the 33-page study.
The study utilized the Mayo Clinic's Pediatric Testicular Biobank for Fertility Preservation, which has been recruiting patients primarily from pediatric urology departments since 2015. Researchers analyzed testicular specimens from 87 young individuals (ages 0-17) undergoing fertility preservation surgery for various health reasons. Among these, 16 were gender dysphoric boys between the ages of 10 and 16, all of whom began identifying as transgender girls between the ages of 2 and 15. At the time of surgery, 9 patients (56%) were already on puberty blockers, with exposure ranging from 3 to 52 months. The authors noted that 100% of the 16 children would eventually go on to take them, highlighting “the widespread nature of PB intervention in this demographic.”
Among nine patients treated with puberty blockers, two exhibited unusual features in their testicles upon physical examination. One patient had abnormalities in both testicles, including incomplete development of the tunica albuginea, which is a protective covering around the testicles. The other patient had a right testicle that was difficult to detect.
Applying these models to a PB-treated patient that they appeared pre-pubertal across the entire tissue. This combined with the noted gland atrophy and abnormalities from the histology data raise a potential concern regarding the complete ’reversibility’ and reproductive fitness of SSC.
On a personal note, I would like to talk through this foreword to the children and young people at the heart of this Review. I have decided not to write to you separately because it is important that everyone hears the same message. Some of you have been really clear that you want much better advice on the options available to you and the risks and benefits of different courses of action and will be pleased by what you will read in this report. Others of you have said you just want access to puberty blockers and hormones as quickly as possible, and may be upset that I am not recommending this. I have been very mindful that you may be disappointed by this. However, what I want to be sure about is that you are getting the best combination of treatments, and this means putting in place a research programme to look at all possible options, and to work out which ones give the best results. There are some important reasons for this decision.
Firstly, you must have the same standards of care as everyone else in the NHS, and that means basing treatments on good evidence. I have been disappointed by the lack of evidence on the long-term impact of taking hormones from an early age; research has let us all down, most importantly you. However, we cannot expect you to make life-changing decisions in a vacuum without being able to weigh their risks and benefits now and in the long-term, and we have to build the evidence-base with good studies going forward. That is why I am asking you to join any research studies that look at the longer-term outcomes of these interventions so you can help all those coming behind you. We have to show that the treatments are safe and produce the positive outcomes you want from them. People in research studies often do better than people who are on regular treatment because they get the chance to try new approaches, as well as getting much closer follow-up and support.
Secondly, medication is binary, but the fastest growing group identifying under the trans umbrella is non-binary, and we know even less about the outcomes for this group. Some of you will also become more fluid in your gender identity as you grow older. We do not know the ‘sweet spot’ when someone becomes settled in their sense of self, nor which people are most likely to benefit from medical transition. When making life-changing decisions, what is the correct balance between keeping options as flexible and open as possible as you move into adulthood, and responding to how you feel right now?
Finally, I know you need more than medical intervention, but services are really stretched, and you are not getting the wider support you need in managing any mental health problems, arranging fertility preservation, getting help with any challenges relating to neurodiversity, or even getting counselling to work through questions and issues you may have. We need to look at all the elements that are needed in a package of care that will help you thrive and fulfil your broader life goals.
It depresses me that it will be years before we get anything like this in any blue state.
It seems obvious that social transitioning just puts people on a medical pipeline, but publishing a real study on the topic seems impossible.
The worst thing is that the data probably already exists but the researchers that have it are likely deeply invested in it never seeing the light of day. I.E. different gender services at various hospitals all over the U.S.
I feel like if this Cass Review kicks off, and we look back on trans ideology,I truly believe that we'll be asking the question "What else that we take for scientific fact is up for "no debate?" What other ideological bubbles did we not see?
. Gynecomastia can also be seen in cisgender men treated for prostate cancer with androgen deprivation therapy (27). Histologically, these individuals are seen to have acinar and lobular expansion. Both of these are different from the tissue of hormone treated transgender women who have duct, lobule and acini development identical to that of cisgender women, along with pseudolactational changes
