Culture Tranny News Megathread - Hot tranny newds
- Thread starter trannyfucker
- Start date
New Fag
kiwifarms.net
- Joined
- Dec 17, 2019
- Joined
- Jul 7, 2020
It's true that men are more confrontational than women and more likely to complain about issues in general, but I honestly don't think men will give much of a shit who uses the men's bathroom. The reason men usually don't whip out their dicks in front of women isn't because we're shy, it's just because we're polite. The reason women need segregated bathrooms is because many men are creeps and a potential threat to women's physical safety as well as to their privacy.
I honestly wouldn't have a problem if bathrooms were divided along the lines of Unisex and Women, but no way in hell should trannies be allowed into women's bathrooms. Anyone who thinks they should be is either brainwashed, insane or both.
Edit: Actually it also has a great deal to do with how male sexuality differs from female sexuality as well. Males have the ability to impregnate a practically unlimited number of females, so we are genetically predisposed to look for mating opportunities all of the time. Rape is even a successful mating strategy in evolutionary terms. Females are a lot more vulnerable in biological terms and due to their biology are a lot less interested in sex with strangers, even if they did have the ability to overpower a man, which they don't. Women can certainly rape men or otherwise coerce them sexually, but they never do it in public bathrooms. That is why a civilized society has to socialize its men and protect its women. Nobody can change their gender and biological reality cannot be erased.
This is probably obvious to most of you, but if any woman has a sense of discomfort about sharing a bathroom with men but can't articulate precisely why, there's your explanation.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Jan 1, 2020
diroama
kiwifarms.net
- Joined
- Dec 28, 2019
Straight men aren't attracted to all women, though I'm sure there are some straight men who would find strong, muscular women like those pictures attractive.
LateNightMuffin
kiwifarms.net
- Joined
- Jul 25, 2019
He ran unopposed.
diroama
kiwifarms.net
- Joined
- Dec 28, 2019
And if a 'straight' guy is fucking one of the top three there's going to come a point between their overly large hand grabbing his cock and their balls bouncing in his face that he's got to question whether he really is straight (hint: he isn't).
- Joined
- Aug 16, 2019
You hear that a lot from gays, but I don’t think that‘s it. These are narcissistic attention seeking parents. Homosexuality in a child may begin to reveal itself, sure, but isn’t something that you can visually document and post on your mommy blog. What are you going to post, a picture of a boy in normal boy clothes playing with his dinosaur toys? How does that communicate his gayness and thus win you internet points? It’s something you may suspect will manifest as they age, but it’s just not exploitable until and unless that kid manages to get itself oppressed in some real or imaginary way, and that can’t happen until they’re a teenager and everyone around him realizes he’s gay.
Trooning kids is like discovering that you have the power to create indigo children and force others to admire you for it. You just need costumes and makeup and yes, possibly a gay kid, but this way you get to profit socially off the gay kid, and you couldn’t if you left him alone and just let him grow into a typical gay.
So yes, sociopathic narcy homophobe moms might prefer transing their son to watching him grow up into a gay, but it‘s not the homophobe part that is operating the engine, it’s the sociopathic narcy part.
ETA: re those supposedly hot trannies. I read a study long ago that showed that the only consistent preference appearing amongst straight men of all cultures is a waist/hip ratio around .7 (or lower). This is because it’s the most reliable secondary sex characteristic indicating sexual maturity. A girl might remain fairly flat chested her whole life, but she will almost always have a distinct waist and wider hips unless she porks up. Any guy who prefers fucking something with a ratio of 1 is not exclusively attracted to women. They’re either also attracted to men, true pedos, or you know, are fetishists who prefer hamplanets to females. And a .7 ratio is something almost no troon can even begin to accomplish.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Feb 22, 2017
It's a violation of Gofundme's policy (last I heard) to allow fundraising for legal defense of people accused of violent crimes. I'm not sure how to report it though.
- Joined
- Feb 13, 2020
You think reporting it would result in anything else other than cookie-cutter "thank you for reporting this campaign" and "we have found no violation of the TOS" e-mails? GFM, like any good Silicon Valley tech firm, has a very strong political bias.
Xiphias
kiwifarms.net
- Joined
- Aug 22, 2019
Yup. There's even research that women are extra traumatised if they are sexually assaulted in a way that could result in pregnancy (v.s. being forced to give a blowjob, for example), and they are also extra traumatised if they were assaulted during the age where they are the most fertile (not that it isn't traumatic otherwise, it's just even more traumatising in this case). This is likely an evolutionary adaptation to just how much a burden it is to women to carry a rapists' child, and the trauma can be summarised as "having control of your reproductive capacity wrested from you".
- Joined
- Jan 31, 2015
You had to show extremly photoshopped pictures of men instead of pictures that show how manly they actually look didn't you?? Troon chasing much??
Edens neck, face & shoulders are broader than of the bloke behind him
And ol' Tim is becoming more masculine as he ages
Huge square masculine face & a broad chest & shoulders. He also has giant hands & feet.
GAY indeed.
Idk who the third faggot is.
And the women look like what happens when women pump themselves full of steroids. Ever seen female body builders??
They are female but steroids made them look manly & grotesque.
Not many men are attracted to women who transformed their bodies into hairy, masculine hulks. HOWEVER that doesn't mean straight men are eager to stick their dick into the ass/srs man-cave of another bloke just because he is extremly faggy, has long hair & fake tits.
Edit: Lmao tranny chaser mad
Last edited:
TchPiKinmup
kiwifarms.net
- Joined
- Oct 3, 2017
- Joined
- Jan 1, 2020
eh, still more fuckable than bodybuilder chicks.
- Joined
- Jul 19, 2019
If you can't trust SpERG, who can you trust?
- Joined
- Aug 21, 2020
Some people are very happy to fuck trannies, but they are people with paraphilias who actively enjoy and seek out the mix of primary and secondary sex characteristics. Many of them are closet AGPs themselves, as AGP (Autogynephilia) and GAMP (gynoandromorphila) appear to be connected.
I see the existence of men who prefer MtFs as a good thing, a ’for every foot, there is a shoe’ type synchronicity, balance in the universe etc etc.
The problem is that most trannies hate GAMPs, they are derided as ‘chasers’, because the existence of men who prefer them to actual women ruins the entire ‘trans women are women’ fantasy delusion.
The phenomenon of men who prefer FtMs isn’t well studied, but you can definitely witness it as an emerging paraphilia if you read the comments on the FtM sex/BDSM subreddits. These men do not appear to be homosexual in any shape or form though, as part of the kink seems to reminding/demonstrating that FtMs are female (breeding kink, deliberate misgenderimg etc). Seems more related to the straight men who believe they can ‘correct’ Lesbians with their magical conversion dicks, IMO.
Women with paraphilias are a LOT less common (this applies to all paraphilias, not just trans related ones) although the Internet seems to have facilitated an increase in females with erotic target location error, hence the emergence of autohomoeroticism.
This video is a detransitioned woman (FtMtF) explaining how gay porn/anime contributed to her transition (she calls it autoandrophilia but Blanchard, who coined the term autogynephila, does not believe they are opposite equivalents (quote in spoiler)
From observing the accounts of women in relationships with MtF or FtM people it seems less about sexual fetishes and more about either sunk cost fallacy (the relationship exists prior to the troonery and they decide to try and stick it out/are stuck due to other commitments, AGPs LOVE to come out when the wife is knocked up) or woke social clout, often combined with low self esteem (see rapey Riley Dennis‘ chubby fiancée) or internalised lesbophobia/strict religious upbringing (see Jamie Raine’s fiancée Shaba- her Muslim parents came round to the idea of her marrying a woman eventually, but only after her girlfriend grew enough testosterone beard to superficially pass as Male: https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/...other-bride-complains-shes-lost-daughter.html).
TLDR: human sexuality is complex and the existence of men (and/or women) who actively pursue trannies/have relationships with trannies does not mean that sexual orientation is defined by gender (or has secretly been defined by gender all along and no one ever knew due to made up bullshit like ‘cissexism’)
The clue is in the name SEXual orientation.
You do you, boo, just stop trying to convince the rest of society that the existence of transgenderism means redefining everything to suit YOU.
The ideal world you think you are working towards (transpeople being treated as if their internal gender feelz are more important than their sex) will not look the way you envisage it.
Rather than let all the bearded, low-effort AGPs into women’s spaces, companies and services will make everything mixed sex (GREAT for voyeurism, TERRIBLE for validation).
Refusing to have your sex accurately recorded on your medical records will result in trannies getting shitter healthcare (female hearts transplanted into male bodies means a greater chance of death within 12 months).
Changing legal sex means pregnant FtMs can be denied protections in the workplace, because maternity laws refer specifically to ‘women‘.
Complaints about being misgendered will result in people dropping pronouns entirely and just repeating whole names over and over, the way an autistic child speaks about a box of cereal, or freezing you out of everything, because normies hate drama.
Period fetishisation will be a lot less satisfying for physiologic autogynephiles (AGP subtype that gets off over the idea of female bodily function) now that all these ‘men‘ have periods too, and manufacturers are removing pink packages and supermarkets are renaming the ‘feminine hygiene‘ aisle.
Y’all are destroying the things you love (sex stereotypes, women’s spaces, clubs and sports, gay sex and related culture, such as bath houses, anything and everything lesbian, which has gone back underground as it was in the 1950s, your own bodies, and the meanings of the categories you desperately wish you belonged in, man/woman/male/female)
And you don’t even seem to realise it.
I used to be pretty supportive of transpeoples rights to peaceful self expression and protections against discrimination in housing and education etc, but then you silly fuckers went and overplayed your hand.
When I first heard ‘sex is a spectrum, gender identity is innate’ I did what the troonbrigade demanded and went off to ‘educate myself’.
I’m really educated on trans talking points now but I suspect that what I‘ve learned wasn’t quite what the woke activists intended.
As a dear friend once said to me, ‘There is no such thing as a chick with a dick. It’s just a bloke with tits’
I see the existence of men who prefer MtFs as a good thing, a ’for every foot, there is a shoe’ type synchronicity, balance in the universe etc etc.
The problem is that most trannies hate GAMPs, they are derided as ‘chasers’, because the existence of men who prefer them to actual women ruins the entire ‘trans women are women’ fantasy delusion.
The phenomenon of men who prefer FtMs isn’t well studied, but you can definitely witness it as an emerging paraphilia if you read the comments on the FtM sex/BDSM subreddits. These men do not appear to be homosexual in any shape or form though, as part of the kink seems to reminding/demonstrating that FtMs are female (breeding kink, deliberate misgenderimg etc). Seems more related to the straight men who believe they can ‘correct’ Lesbians with their magical conversion dicks, IMO.
Women with paraphilias are a LOT less common (this applies to all paraphilias, not just trans related ones) although the Internet seems to have facilitated an increase in females with erotic target location error, hence the emergence of autohomoeroticism.
This video is a detransitioned woman (FtMtF) explaining how gay porn/anime contributed to her transition (she calls it autoandrophilia but Blanchard, who coined the term autogynephila, does not believe they are opposite equivalents (quote in spoiler)
Clinical mentions of heterosexual women with strong masculine traits who say that they feel as if they were homosexual men and who feel strongly attracted to effeminate men go back over 100 years. I do not think they are the female equivalents of autogynephiles, and to underscore that point I have started referring to them as autohomoerotics. Some of these individuals do develop clinically significant gender dysphoria, and it is well documented that at least a few autohomoerotic gender dysphorics have undergone surgical sex reassignment and were satisfied with their decision to do so.
Until recent times, autohomoerotic female-to-male transsexuals were quite rare. The differences between autogynephilia in males and autohomoeroticism in females may seem subtle. Autogynephilic (male) gender dysphorics are attracted to the idea of having a woman’s body; autohomoerotic (female) gender dysphorics are attracted to the idea of participating in gay male sex. For autogynephiles, becoming a lesbian woman is a secondary goal—the logical consequence of being attracted to women and wanting to become a woman. For autohomoerotics, becoming a gay man appears to be the primary goal or very close to it.
There are also striking differences in developmental history. Many autogynephilic trans people report a period in their lives, usually during puberty, when they put on women’s undergarments (often “borrowed” from their mothers or sisters) and masturbated to orgasm. In contrast, self-reports of masturbating to orgasm in men’s underwear are missing in the histories of autohomoerotic females.
Source: https://quillette.com/2019/11/06/what-is-autogynephilia-an-interview-with-dr-ray-blanchard/
Until recent times, autohomoerotic female-to-male transsexuals were quite rare. The differences between autogynephilia in males and autohomoeroticism in females may seem subtle. Autogynephilic (male) gender dysphorics are attracted to the idea of having a woman’s body; autohomoerotic (female) gender dysphorics are attracted to the idea of participating in gay male sex. For autogynephiles, becoming a lesbian woman is a secondary goal—the logical consequence of being attracted to women and wanting to become a woman. For autohomoerotics, becoming a gay man appears to be the primary goal or very close to it.
There are also striking differences in developmental history. Many autogynephilic trans people report a period in their lives, usually during puberty, when they put on women’s undergarments (often “borrowed” from their mothers or sisters) and masturbated to orgasm. In contrast, self-reports of masturbating to orgasm in men’s underwear are missing in the histories of autohomoerotic females.
Source: https://quillette.com/2019/11/06/what-is-autogynephilia-an-interview-with-dr-ray-blanchard/
From observing the accounts of women in relationships with MtF or FtM people it seems less about sexual fetishes and more about either sunk cost fallacy (the relationship exists prior to the troonery and they decide to try and stick it out/are stuck due to other commitments, AGPs LOVE to come out when the wife is knocked up) or woke social clout, often combined with low self esteem (see rapey Riley Dennis‘ chubby fiancée) or internalised lesbophobia/strict religious upbringing (see Jamie Raine’s fiancée Shaba- her Muslim parents came round to the idea of her marrying a woman eventually, but only after her girlfriend grew enough testosterone beard to superficially pass as Male: https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/...other-bride-complains-shes-lost-daughter.html).
TLDR: human sexuality is complex and the existence of men (and/or women) who actively pursue trannies/have relationships with trannies does not mean that sexual orientation is defined by gender (or has secretly been defined by gender all along and no one ever knew due to made up bullshit like ‘cissexism’)
The clue is in the name SEXual orientation.
You do you, boo, just stop trying to convince the rest of society that the existence of transgenderism means redefining everything to suit YOU.
The ideal world you think you are working towards (transpeople being treated as if their internal gender feelz are more important than their sex) will not look the way you envisage it.
Rather than let all the bearded, low-effort AGPs into women’s spaces, companies and services will make everything mixed sex (GREAT for voyeurism, TERRIBLE for validation).
Refusing to have your sex accurately recorded on your medical records will result in trannies getting shitter healthcare (female hearts transplanted into male bodies means a greater chance of death within 12 months).
Changing legal sex means pregnant FtMs can be denied protections in the workplace, because maternity laws refer specifically to ‘women‘.
Complaints about being misgendered will result in people dropping pronouns entirely and just repeating whole names over and over, the way an autistic child speaks about a box of cereal, or freezing you out of everything, because normies hate drama.
Period fetishisation will be a lot less satisfying for physiologic autogynephiles (AGP subtype that gets off over the idea of female bodily function) now that all these ‘men‘ have periods too, and manufacturers are removing pink packages and supermarkets are renaming the ‘feminine hygiene‘ aisle.
snip from: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blanchard's_transsexualism_typology
Blanchard identified four types of autogynephilic sexual fantasy (nb: any or all can occur in an individual AGP)
Transvestic autogynephilia: arousal to the act or fantasy of wearing typically feminine clothing
Behavioral autogynephilia: arousal to the act or fantasy of doing something regarded as feminine
Physiologic autogynephilia: arousal to fantasies of body functions specific to people regarded as female
Anatomic autogynephilia: arousal to the fantasy of having a normative woman's body, or parts of one
Blanchard identified four types of autogynephilic sexual fantasy (nb: any or all can occur in an individual AGP)
Transvestic autogynephilia: arousal to the act or fantasy of wearing typically feminine clothing
Behavioral autogynephilia: arousal to the act or fantasy of doing something regarded as feminine
Physiologic autogynephilia: arousal to fantasies of body functions specific to people regarded as female
Anatomic autogynephilia: arousal to the fantasy of having a normative woman's body, or parts of one
Y’all are destroying the things you love (sex stereotypes, women’s spaces, clubs and sports, gay sex and related culture, such as bath houses, anything and everything lesbian, which has gone back underground as it was in the 1950s, your own bodies, and the meanings of the categories you desperately wish you belonged in, man/woman/male/female)
And you don’t even seem to realise it.
I used to be pretty supportive of transpeoples rights to peaceful self expression and protections against discrimination in housing and education etc, but then you silly fuckers went and overplayed your hand.
When I first heard ‘sex is a spectrum, gender identity is innate’ I did what the troonbrigade demanded and went off to ‘educate myself’.
I’m really educated on trans talking points now but I suspect that what I‘ve learned wasn’t quite what the woke activists intended.
As a dear friend once said to me, ‘There is no such thing as a chick with a dick. It’s just a bloke with tits’
Last edited:
- Joined
- Dec 4, 2018
Can’t it be both? The little boy, Kai Shappley, who was featured on the troon episode of the new Babystitters Club Netflix show is absolutely a case of the former.
Same old story: mom pops out four boys but no girls, troons out her youngest but the Shappleys are evangelical Christians and prior to trooning out Kai, Kimberley Shappley admits to hitting her son for playing with girl toys and fears that her three year old may turn out to be a homosexual.
Susie Green, almost the exact same story minus the evangelical angle. Four boys, no girls, youngest Jack displays preferences for girl toys and activities, both parents express fear of him turning homo, bye bye Jack’s cock at 16.
Hunter Schaefer’s father is a pastor. Indya Moore was raised in a very strict Jehovah’s Witness household and was actually sent to gay conversion therapy. Just a few examples.
- Joined
- Jan 3, 2017
TL;DR: A fascinating essay on the degenerate sexual insanity that precedes the Visigoths stampeding over the seven hills of Rome.
- Joined
- Aug 21, 2020
I thought Camille LaPaglia‘s commentary on the end of western civilisation was just highfalutin overdramatised fear-mongering.
Thought.
Past tense.
Mate, we‘re fucked, aren’t we? We’re going to be forced to replace the scientific method with ‘other ways of knowing’ and we’ll all die out one by one, because non-binary two-spirit witch doctory is objectively a less effective cancer treatment than chemotherapy, but anyone who expresses concern about ‘progress’ will cancelled (or taken to the hospital basement and executed).
Calculus
kiwifarms.net
- Joined
- Jul 4, 2018
Large
kiwifarms.net
- Joined
- Dec 30, 2018
September 13, 2020By Andre Van Mol, Michael K. Laidlaw, Miriam Grossman and Paul McHugh
The American Journal of Psychiatry has issued a major correction to a recent study. The Bränström study reanalysis demonstrated that neither “gender-affirming hormone treatment” nor “gender-affirming surgery” reduced the need of transgender-identifying people for mental health services. Fad medicine is bad medicine, and gender-anxious people deserve better.
“Why do researchers get away with sloppy science? In part because, far too often, no one is watching and no one is there to stop them.” –“The Irreproducibility Crisis of Modern Science,” National Association of Scholars.
A major correction has been issued by the American Journal of Psychiatry. The authors and editors of an October 2019 study, titled “Reduction in mental health treatment utilization among transgender individuals after gender-affirming surgeries: a total population study,” have retracted its primary conclusion. Letters to the editor by twelve authors, including ourselves, led to a reanalysis of the data and a corrected conclusion stating that in fact the data showed no improvement after surgical treatment. The following is the background to our published letter and a summary of points of the critical analysis of the study.
A Crisis of Irreproducibility in Psychology and Medicine
It has been an open secret for some time that there is a crisis of irreproducibility of scientific studies in medicine and other fields. No less a figure than the Director of the NIH, Dr. Francis Collins, wrote that, “the checks and balances that once ensured scientific fidelity have been hobbled. This has compromised the ability of today’s researchers to reproduce others’ findings.” For example, the National Association of Scholars reports, “In 2012 the biotechnology firm Amgen tried to reproduce 53 ‘landmark’ studies in hematology and oncology, but could only replicate 6 (11%).” In 2015 an article was published in Science in which there was an attempt to replicate 100 studies from three well-known psychology journals in 2008. In the original studies, nearly all had produced statistically significant results, whereas in the study replications, only a little over a third produced similar significant results.
Perhaps nowhere in medicine and psychology is this problem of irreproducibility worse than in studies of people who claim to have a mismatch between their sex and their internal sense of being male or female.
When we first analyzed the study last October, it was obvious that it had major shortcomings. Dr. Van Mol led our team—which includes endocrinologist Michael Laidlaw, child and adolescent psychiatrist Miriam Grossman, and Johns Hopkins professor of psychiatry Paul McHugh—to summarize our findings into a compact, 500-word letter to the editor. We were not the only clinicians to question the study’s legitimacy. A total of seven letters, all critical of the study, were published on August 1, including our own. The editors included a response from the original authors, and they explained why it took ten months to publish the letters.
Let’s look at the study and the shortfalls we found. The Swedish Total Population Register of 9.7 million people and national patient databases were used to assess the effectiveness of “gender-affirming hormone treatment” and “gender-affirming surgery” in affecting three endpoints: prescriptions for antidepressants and anti-anxiety medications, healthcare visits for mood or anxiety disorders, and post-suicide attempt hospitalizations. The study authors, Bränström and Pachankis, concluded that gender-affirming hormones offered no effect but that surgery did reduce mental health treatment. They further asserted the finding “provides timely support for policies that ensure coverage of gender-affirming treatments.”
The authors used an odd combination of retrospective data collected over an eleven-year period from 2005 to 2015, together with limited psychiatric outcomes over a “prospective” one-year period during 2015 and no control group. Qualifying criteria were, to be alive in Sweden as of December 31, 2014, and to have a diagnosis of gender incongruence. The first graphic in the study specified “time since last gender affirming surgery” and traced back ten years. That chart could easily be misinterpreted as a prospective ten-year follow-up.
Where the Study Falls Short
One problem leading to irreproducibility is loss to follow-up. This refers to patients who participated in a study but at some point are considered “lost”: they are either unwilling or unable to communicate, missing, or dead. Loss to follow-up is frequently seen in studies that validate the benefits of transition, and it was strongly implied in the Bränström study by several metrics. First, the authors reported that 2,679 Swedes were diagnosed with “gender incongruence.” Though seemingly large, the numbers are a full order of magnitude below what DSM-V prevalence statistics would project. Where did the remainder go?
A paucity of gender-affirming surgeries also suggested loss to follow-up. Table 3 of their study showed that only 38 percent of people diagnosed with gender incongruence had any type of affirmative surgery, and only 53 percent of those—about 20 percent of the total—had surgery of the reproductive organs. Gender affirming surgery is free in Sweden, so where are these patients? And for those whose last surgery was ten or more years earlier, how many completed suicide, died of other related causes, or emigrated from Sweden prior to the study timeline?
In terms of follow-up care, the authors only measured three outcomes as listed above. Overlooked were key data of completed suicides, healthcare visits, prescriptions, and hospitalizations for the litany of other medical or psychological diagnoses potentially related to gender-affirming treatments. Such information was available through Sweden’s multiple registry databases, so why not use it? These omissions suggested cherry-picking data in order to obtain the desired results.
We concluded our letter by comparing this study to the one we consider perhaps the best of its kind, also from Sweden, the 2011 Dhejne study. The Dhejne team made extensive use of numerous, specified Swedish registries and examined data from 324 patients in Sweden over thirty years who underwent sex reassignment. They used population controls matched by birth year, birth sex, and reassigned sex. When followed out beyond ten years, the sex-reassigned group had nineteen times the rate of completed suicides and nearly three times the rate of all-cause mortality and inpatient psychiatric care, compared to the general population. These important findings could have easily been updated by Bränström and Pachankis to the more current time frame.
Which brings us back to the August AJP and why seven critical letters took ten months to see print. Along with the letters, the AJP editors published a correction that explained their need “to seek statistical consultations.” These consultants “concurred with many of the points raised.” The study’s authors were asked to reanalyze their data, and the results demonstrated “no advantage to surgery” for their three endpoints in the subject population. The authors noted in their response letter that their “conclusion” “was too strong.”
Unresolved Problems
The AJP correction is significant, but the study still suffers from numerous problems. This has been a win for patients insofar as sex-reassignment surgery has been demoted from improving mental health to having no effect. The reanalysis on the other hand showed an increase in treatment for anxiety after surgery. Why was there not also an expected increase in post-surgical depression, as Drs. Malone and Roman argued in their letter to the editor? Increased post-surgical anxiety without an accompanying increased depression rate is a highly unusual finding. Were these subjects also lost to follow-up?
With respect to cross-sex hormones, it has been shown that 23 percent of patients on high-dose anabolic steroids like testosterone, which is prescribed to every female-to-male patient, meet criteria for a major mood syndrome, and 3 to 12 percent have developed psychotic symptoms. Why is this not reflected in the study or the reanalysis?
There remain major deficits in knowledge that the authors easily could have filled by examining the Swedish databases. One of the strengths of the 2011 Dhejne study is that an increase in mortality is clearly seen at around 10 years. The current study fails to look at available data over a similar time course to assess if mortality has been affected. Similarly, completed suicide information is missing from Bränström. How can one understand suicidality in relation to hormones and surgery by only looking at suicide attempts and not deaths? Likewise, if one wants to understand the full range of psychiatric disorders in this population by examining medication data, then the use of all appropriate pharmaceuticals should be included, not only anti-anxiety and anti-depressant agents. However, simply tabulating prescriptions for psychiatric medications provides a limited and inadequate measure of the degree of emotional distress in any population. Many distressed individuals decline to seek professional help or will refuse pharmaceuticals if they do. The effects of these gaps in knowledge are much like holes cut out of a portrait; the full picture is lost and distorted when the key facial features are removed.
Our co-author Dr. Paul McHugh ended sex reassignment surgeries at John Hopkins Medical School when a study from his department revealed that the mental and social health of patients undergoing sex reassignment surgery did not improve. He adds here that this paper, and even the correction, misdirects clinical thought in many ways. Most crucially it presumes an unproblematic future for these subjects, despite evidence that the psychological state of many will, after surgery, worsen with time. Our experience at Hopkins, when we first recognized that the psychological well-being of patients undergoing surgery did not improve, rested on relatively short-term assessments. The long-term Swedish study of Dhejne demonstrated that the serious fallouts including suicide emerged only after ten years. None of this clinical experience is reflected in this paper or its correction.
Now how will the thirteen-year-old girls who have had breast amputations and testosterone fare? Abigail Shrier writes in her excellent exposé Irreversible Damage that, “Nearly all of the detransitioners I spoke with are plagued with regret. . . . They possess a startlingly masculine voice that will not lift. . . . They live with slashes across their chests . . . and flaps of skin that don’t quite resemble nipples.”
How about children who are ultimately sterilized by puberty blockers followed by cross-sex hormones and even gonad removal? These unethical surgeries are receiving funding by the very NIH that claims to be working to correct problems of irreproducibility. These experiments are beyond reproducibility problems: they are ethical failures by which doctors cause long-term harm to children and adolescents, all based on political activism supported by faulty science.
The Bränström study reanalysis demonstrated that neither “gender-affirming hormone treatment” nor “gender-affirming surgery” reduced the need of transgender-identifying people for mental health services. We appreciate the editors, the study authors, and other letter writers for carefully scrutinizing the study and publishing these findings. However, our team believes that many of the pro-transition studies we have read fare no better. Fad medicine is bad medicine, and gender-anxious people deserve better.
About the Author
Andre Van Mol
André Van Mol, MD is a board-certified family physician in private practice. He is the co-chair of the American College of Pediatricians' Committee on Adolescent Sexuality, and a blogger and media spokesperson for the Christian Medical & Dental Associations. He and his wife ... READ MORE
Michael K. Laidlaw
Michael K. Laidlaw, MD is a board-certified physician in Rocklin, California specializing in Endocrinology, Diabetes, and Metabolism.
Miriam Grossman
Miriam Grossman, MD is a medical doctor with training in pediatrics and child, adolescent, and adult psychiatry. She is the author of Unprotected and You’re Teaching My Child WHAT? Dr. Grossman can be followed on her website, Facebook, and Twitter @Miriam_Grossman.
Paul McHugh
Paul McHugh, MD, is University Distinguished Service Professor of Psychiatry at Johns Hopkins Medical School and the former psychiatrist in chief at Johns Hopkins Hospital. He is the author of The Mind Has Mountains: Reflections on Society and Psychiatry.