Another tax lawyer heard from
It’s That Barrister Again.
Here’s the thing:
They’re not reversible.
Also, comparing puberty blockers to abortion is just random. You might as well compare them to espresso machines or luxury yachts.
Tip Jar
It’s That Barrister Again.
Here’s the thing:
They’re not reversible.
Also, comparing puberty blockers to abortion is just random. You might as well compare them to espresso machines or luxury yachts.
It’s a scandal! Just like in the UK they effectively deny safe, properly regulated access to effective COVID-19 vaccines, and they deny safe, properly regulated access to 100% effective antidepressants. Not to mention safe, properly regulated access to porcine aviation.
Joylon, tell me again about these ‘safe and reversible’ puberty blockers. Explain to me how it will be entirely possible for a girl who decides they might want to transition to be a boy to take puberty blockers for 5-8 years with no impact on their long term health (given that these adverse effects are well known). Explain to me how a trans man, having attained age of 18-25 (for arguments sake) and deciding they actually want to detransition back to being a woman can easily and safely reverse the effect of puberty blockers.
I’ll wait. I want detailed medical and scientific evidence, not an activists rhetoric and lies.
I’d guess they’d argue that abortion and puberty blockers are both about controlling one’s own body.
Not that I’m in agreement that kids should get puberty blockers!
Maybe they would, but it would be silly, because the right to abortion isn’t based on a simplistic right “to control one’s own body.” There have been some slogans to that effect I think, but the legal and medical arguments aren’t that crude.
Outcome of abortion denial: A woman donates her body for 9 months, risking life and future health, and possibly future hopes and dreams, and brings another unwanted child into the world.
Outcome of puberty-blocker denial: Gender dysphoric person’s body develops normally. This causes distress because s/he doesn’t look the way he would like to.
Ophelia, #4, the legal arguments may not be that crude but those coming from the legal mind of Jo Maugham, QC, certainly are.
Actually, I’ll go further than that and say that Maugham’s arguments are so bad that crude would be a vast improvement.
Well quite.
Outcome of abortion: no child in the near future.
Outcome of puberty blockers: no future children, ever.
Far from being a “breathing space” to consider whether they will one day want to transition, virtually 100% of the children who take them go on to transition by then taking cross-sex hormones. This makes the individual sterile. It also causes other medical conditions and appears to inhibit normal mental and emotional development.
Why do puberty blockers invariably lead to persistence? They’re not quite sure, but suspect it might be a combination of watching their peers grow up while they frustratingly remain prepubescent, and keeping the brain in an immature state. Going through natural puberty seems to resolve gender dysphoria for most children.
Because they never went through puberty, there is a fair chance that they will never have an orgasm. But they’ll be better at ‘passing.’ What 10 year old can’t be trusted to make those lifelong decisions?
You know who else opposed puberty blockers? Hitler!!!!
What’s any of this got to do with Keira Bell? Unless Maugham is arguing that there should be “safe, properly regulated access to reversible puberty blockers” – as opposed to the current system of the Tavistock dishing out irreversible puberty blockers on demand like smarties at Halloween?
‘Safe properly regulated access to’ what? A class of drugs that does not exist. If puberty blockers were reversible, they’d might be used to prevent the extreme early puberty that is increasingly common in western girls. Is there any hint that such a use is even suggested?
I’m not sure about British law, but I’ve seen it pointed out that kids who are legally too young to get a tattoo or ear-piercing are being considered ‘mature enough’ to make lifelong decisions about puberty…before puberty.
And most of them probably don’t have a clear idea what puberty is. So few pre-pubescent children do.
Sastra @ 9,
Seems to me that the “sunk cost fallacy” would also explain it. “I’ve made all these sacrifices by going on puberty blockers, don’t want that all to be for nothing, might as well ‘see it through.'”
John, puberty blockers aren’t quite reversible, but it is possible to stop their use. Why do we know this? Not because of the kids pushed down the greased slide of the trans cult. Because of a previous group of children they were used on: short girls with precocious puberty.
https://www.statnews.com/2017/02/02/lupron-puberty-children-health-problems/
And what happened to those girls? A litany of medical horrors.
There is no safe use of Lupron in children.
Sastra,
There’s another factor I’ve seen suggested.
Proponents describe the use of puberty blockers as providing time, a breathing space during which gender dysphoric kids can decide whether or not they want medical intervention.
But puberty blockers, of course, are medical intervention. A child on them has already taken a step toward transition. It’s a step falsely touted as “fully reversible”, but it’s a step. And it’s harder to turn back after you’ve started the journey.
Papito, those are two separate populations: children with precocious puberty, and very short children. Looks like they’ve stopped using it for the latter.
Children with precocious puberty will be taller than their peers, but will grow up to be shorter, for reasons to do with bone growth (I’m sketchy on the details).