It’s a phase caused to numb the pain of an unhappy time in a person’s life, like SJWism or MGTOW.
Transgender: it isn’t you, it’s your anatomy. (logically, still you)
SJW: it isn’t you, it’s white people. (so no, they aren’t feminists, race>sex or male examples wouldn’t exist)
MGTOW: it isn’t you, it’s women. (usually white women, so cucks)
When the time passes, it disappears like a goth phase. Otherwise, Hulk rage.
Last month a new chapter was opened in the debate on childhood desistance with the publication of a new article in the International Journal of Transgenderism by a group of transgender-affirming activists and clinicians headed by Julia Temple Newhook. Desistance is when children who are diagnosed as gender dysphoric by medical practitioners go on to accept their bodies and do not end up identifying as transgender once they have passed through puberty. The article questions the exceedingly high rates of desistance reported by previous studies.
Kenneth Zucker’s rebuttal, “The myth of persistence,” is a brilliant riposte. Zucker, a psychologist and clinical lead from 1981 to 2015 at the Child Youth and Family Gender Identity Clinic (GIC), Center for Addiction and Mental Health (CAMH), is an internationally renowned specialist in the field of gender dysphoria and gender-identity development as well as the editor of the journal Archives of Sexual Behavior.
Just pointing out it’s a mental illness will get you arrested here.
Are anorexics fat too? Must I be forced to agree publicly? (dysphoria has many forms)
What about class dysphoria? Must I treat a poor man like a rich man?
This has been about revoking your right to “treat as you find” and express disapproval.
The American Psychiatric Association named Zucker to be the head of the Sexual and Gender Identity Disorders group in 2008 for the fifth edition of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, also known as the DSM-5, and he is a member of the World Professional Association for Transgender Health (WPATH). In short, Zucker is a professionally trained psychologist with a profound expertise in gender dysphoria and the intricacies involved with childhood gender identity disorder (GID) diagnosis (which was reclassified as Gender Dysphoria under the DSM-5). …
Trans activists spearheaded a successful campaign to have Zucker terminated following what Jesse Singal refers to as a “show trial.”
SJWs Always Lie.
Turkeys for Christmas.
It goes to show the depth of their illness, when if you don’t mutilate and harm their group, they’ll punish you.
To reconcile the cognitive dissonance (e.g. cosmetic surgery won’t change a misdiagnosed personality disorder) they force others to make the same mistake out of spite, in a classic sunk cost fallacy.
Typically, if someone wants a ton of cosmetic surgery and a complete physical overhaul, you’d be looking at NPD, BPD and possibly ASPD if they want to look “sexier” (to be a better predator). It’s like changing the cover on a lamp, it doesn’t really matter. In a personality disorder, they will never, ever admit this. Because there’s no bulb.
They want to know they’re worth spending the money on for surgery. Narcissistic, seeking external validation. Covert narcissism can present as constant victimhood and helplessness (a manipulation tactic). The money as a lump sum would work on this group because they’d suddenly “change their mind” and not want surgery.
OR that they can manipulate the clinicians to get what they want, sociopathic. So they’d push for brain surgery if it were the most prestigious treatment option.
OR they think it would actually help, having no stable identity to show, borderline (halfway between neurotic and psychotic). Then they actually have a reason to commit self-murder because they chopped off and “killed” parts of their anatomy already and there’s no going back. Even if you could magically get a POP! new body, you’d need to do years of brutal psychological hard work (adolescence) developing a real personality. No shortcuts.
Painting a door won’t change the house location.
I would hypothesize that when more follow-up data of children who socially transition prior to puberty become available, the persistence rate will be extremely high. This is not a value judgment—it is simply an empirical prediction . . . parents who support, implement, or encourage a gender social transition (and clinicians who recommend one) are implementing a psychosocial treatment that will increase the odds of long-term persistence.
Allow the parents to push it on condition that, as an adult, their child can sue them for barbaric sexual mutilation if they’re wrong and using them for attention (abuse!)…
The pills affect brain development so it’d be quite a lawsuit.
Taking the “desistance myth” and inverting it perfectly, Zucker shows how the Temple Newhook commentary speaks against desistance by pushing social transition:
Temple Newhook et al. (2018) go on to state that “It is important to acknowledge that discouraging social transition [with reference to the Dutch team’s putative therapeutic approach] is itself an intervention with the potential to impact research findings . . .” Fair enough. But Temple Newhook et al. (2018) curiously suppress the inverse: encouraging social transition is itself an intervention with the potential to impact findings. I find this omission astonishing.
Translation: liar liar pants on fire