The question is, does any of this matter to the people promoting the ideology or the people providing the interventions? We know that you cannot talk an adolescent out of this with facts and you cannot change the viewpoint of adults who see this as a social justice issue with facts. I don’t see those driving this as any different. They’re not pushing for adolescent/young adult “transition”because they’re looking at the data and seeing a coherent rationale for irreversibly changing the life course of young people and introducing harm in otherwise healthy bodies. I don’t understand what the religious fervor for intervention is based on, but we cannot logic ourselves out of something that isn’t based in reality to begin with.
It stands to reason that these self-perceptions could and often would change over time. Such self-perceptions are the product of complex, dynamic neural systems that shape our subjective realities and change both spontaneously and in response to our ongoing experiences. It's not clear to me why anyone would've ever thought they would, in all cases, be permanent, immutable, or stable over one's lifetime... https://everythingisbiology.substack.com/p/hallucinating-your-inner-trans-reptile
"Gender ideology" exists through complete denial of well-established, observed, proven stages of every normal child's cognitive development. The "wrong body since birth" trope directly contradicts the birth to 2 stage outlined by Jean Piaget decades ago. This is the sensory-motor phase. The following phases define cognitive and language milestones like object permanence, bodily integrity and continue to the 4th phase, formal operational (age 11-14) when proofs testing hypotheses, logical understandings of cause and effect and logical reasoning emerge. A brief explanation from an older retired teacher, trained back when Piaget was still the legacy:
Child transition was invented in the last couple of decades. The instigators of it, like Dr. John Money, ignored the fact that a child cannot make a rational decision to "change sex."
Not really the point, and there is no "child transition" going on, and even if there were, John Money wouldn't have been around to work on it in the last couple of decades. But all facetiousness aside, my point was that there is nothing in Piaget's work (again, to the best of my knowledge) that would connect with the issue. Unless we're theorizing some neurological development that Piaget did not actually propose. He's not around to speculate on it, alas. But it's always fun to woolgather!
You've missed the point. Piaget's stages of child development, so universally accepted that the NIH lists them on its website, are a comprehensive overview of the growth of cognitive and language processes. The concept that a child comprehends a "born in the wrong body" sensation does not work within these established principles of child development, and John Money, Ray Blanchard, Mark/Marci Bowers, Richard/Rachel Levine all had to have training in Piaget, Vygotsky and Bowlby, thus established child development principles cannot accommodate validity of cross-sex ideation or "trans identity."
Jean Piaget never studied the subject. Period. And thus would not be any kind of authority in this.
You might regard me as an ur-skeptic. I just don't see this nonsense happening. I acknowledge that transsex and intersex situations must exist, but I do not believe they are at all common. I don't see any "trans kids," except on social media.
I believe the whole thing is a distraction from the existential and real problem of RACE SUICIDE.
250 years ago there was a belief in "fuge states" in Europe. People would wander off and forget who they were.
Maybe they happened. Maybe they didn't. I do believe there is such a thing as amnesia, but I likewise won't go any farther.
Good this study has been published. Seems like for years a large variety of people have observed that a majority of trans-identifying youth desist at some time during puberty, I've seen figures offered ranging ftom 50% to 90%. Thus "watchful waiting", rather than instant affirmation that today's activists push for, is the correct strategy. (If it were my progeny I doubt I would ever permit transitioning as long as it were in my power, i think that it's a wrongheaded choice).
Will American media pick up on this study? Seems doubtful.
Thanks for noting Piaget, I was trying to remember where to look for refreshing my memory of normal development stages.
Of course many contemporary educators and psychologists have likely been indoctrinated by post modern derived nonsense and focused on tearing things down and replacing with tropes derived by anything but reason.
The study's findings on the rate of 'desistance' among transgender individuals in Germany are highly questionable due to the limitations of the insurance billing data used. In Germany, insurance companies require diagnoses for services like therapy, but these diagnoses can be placeholders and may not accurately reflect an individual's actual gender identity or their pursuit of medical transition.
The insurance billing data includes all suspected and actual diagnoses, meaning that someone who merely mentioned a suspicion to their general practitioner, without following up with a psychiatrist or psychologist for an official diagnosis, could be included in the study. Additionally, even those with a confirmed diagnosis may not have accessed medical transition, such as hormone replacement therapy (HRT).
Consequently, the study's data may include individuals who never actually had gender dysphoria or pursued medical transition, while simultaneously excluding those who are genuinely transitioning but are invisible to the study due to the peculiarities of the German insurance system. This discrepancy could explain why the study found a rate of 'desistance' that is some crazy higher rate than the norm established by other studies on transgender youth (3% at most).
Although the study does filter down to "confirmed" diagnoses, it does not enforce any specific diagnostic criteria, nor does it ensure that the patients included in the data ever accessed medical transition. As a result, the data, when decoupled from prescribed medications like HRT, is largely unreliable and may not accurately represent the experiences of transgender individuals in Germany.
This seems confused. You begin by talking about "Gender Identity Disorder," which is mainly a term applied to preadolescents who are "gender nonconforming." It has nothing to do with transsexualism (or gender dysphoria, to use the fancy diagnostic term from 50 years ago), which is very rare to begin with and limited to adults and adolescents. I gather unrelated data here have been commingled.
I haven't seen the terms distinguished like this (I'm not an expert). I see the American Psychiatric Association says gender dysphoria replaced "gender identity disorder in DSM-5, presumably in part because of the stigma of the term "disorder."
"Gender Identity Disorder" has nothing to do with transsexualism.
"Gender dysphoria" is the term for transsexualism going back more than 50 years, with a specific definition.
The DSM was not involved; that directory is designed for laypeople and non-specialists, for disorder-coding purposes. Specialists in the field would not be looking in the DSM, where this didn't even exist 50 years ago.
The question is, does any of this matter to the people promoting the ideology or the people providing the interventions? We know that you cannot talk an adolescent out of this with facts and you cannot change the viewpoint of adults who see this as a social justice issue with facts. I don’t see those driving this as any different. They’re not pushing for adolescent/young adult “transition”because they’re looking at the data and seeing a coherent rationale for irreversibly changing the life course of young people and introducing harm in otherwise healthy bodies. I don’t understand what the religious fervor for intervention is based on, but we cannot logic ourselves out of something that isn’t based in reality to begin with.
It stands to reason that these self-perceptions could and often would change over time. Such self-perceptions are the product of complex, dynamic neural systems that shape our subjective realities and change both spontaneously and in response to our ongoing experiences. It's not clear to me why anyone would've ever thought they would, in all cases, be permanent, immutable, or stable over one's lifetime... https://everythingisbiology.substack.com/p/hallucinating-your-inner-trans-reptile
"Gender ideology" exists through complete denial of well-established, observed, proven stages of every normal child's cognitive development. The "wrong body since birth" trope directly contradicts the birth to 2 stage outlined by Jean Piaget decades ago. This is the sensory-motor phase. The following phases define cognitive and language milestones like object permanence, bodily integrity and continue to the 4th phase, formal operational (age 11-14) when proofs testing hypotheses, logical understandings of cause and effect and logical reasoning emerge. A brief explanation from an older retired teacher, trained back when Piaget was still the legacy:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DqUNy1Vcxa0&t=52s
Piaget never studied this subject, to the best of my knowledge.
Child transition was invented in the last couple of decades. The instigators of it, like Dr. John Money, ignored the fact that a child cannot make a rational decision to "change sex."
Not really the point, and there is no "child transition" going on, and even if there were, John Money wouldn't have been around to work on it in the last couple of decades. But all facetiousness aside, my point was that there is nothing in Piaget's work (again, to the best of my knowledge) that would connect with the issue. Unless we're theorizing some neurological development that Piaget did not actually propose. He's not around to speculate on it, alas. But it's always fun to woolgather!
You've missed the point. Piaget's stages of child development, so universally accepted that the NIH lists them on its website, are a comprehensive overview of the growth of cognitive and language processes. The concept that a child comprehends a "born in the wrong body" sensation does not work within these established principles of child development, and John Money, Ray Blanchard, Mark/Marci Bowers, Richard/Rachel Levine all had to have training in Piaget, Vygotsky and Bowlby, thus established child development principles cannot accommodate validity of cross-sex ideation or "trans identity."
Jean Piaget never studied the subject. Period. And thus would not be any kind of authority in this.
You might regard me as an ur-skeptic. I just don't see this nonsense happening. I acknowledge that transsex and intersex situations must exist, but I do not believe they are at all common. I don't see any "trans kids," except on social media.
I believe the whole thing is a distraction from the existential and real problem of RACE SUICIDE.
250 years ago there was a belief in "fuge states" in Europe. People would wander off and forget who they were.
Maybe they happened. Maybe they didn't. I do believe there is such a thing as amnesia, but I likewise won't go any farther.
Good this study has been published. Seems like for years a large variety of people have observed that a majority of trans-identifying youth desist at some time during puberty, I've seen figures offered ranging ftom 50% to 90%. Thus "watchful waiting", rather than instant affirmation that today's activists push for, is the correct strategy. (If it were my progeny I doubt I would ever permit transitioning as long as it were in my power, i think that it's a wrongheaded choice).
Will American media pick up on this study? Seems doubtful.
Thanks for noting Piaget, I was trying to remember where to look for refreshing my memory of normal development stages.
Of course many contemporary educators and psychologists have likely been indoctrinated by post modern derived nonsense and focused on tearing things down and replacing with tropes derived by anything but reason.
The study's findings on the rate of 'desistance' among transgender individuals in Germany are highly questionable due to the limitations of the insurance billing data used. In Germany, insurance companies require diagnoses for services like therapy, but these diagnoses can be placeholders and may not accurately reflect an individual's actual gender identity or their pursuit of medical transition.
The insurance billing data includes all suspected and actual diagnoses, meaning that someone who merely mentioned a suspicion to their general practitioner, without following up with a psychiatrist or psychologist for an official diagnosis, could be included in the study. Additionally, even those with a confirmed diagnosis may not have accessed medical transition, such as hormone replacement therapy (HRT).
Consequently, the study's data may include individuals who never actually had gender dysphoria or pursued medical transition, while simultaneously excluding those who are genuinely transitioning but are invisible to the study due to the peculiarities of the German insurance system. This discrepancy could explain why the study found a rate of 'desistance' that is some crazy higher rate than the norm established by other studies on transgender youth (3% at most).
Although the study does filter down to "confirmed" diagnoses, it does not enforce any specific diagnostic criteria, nor does it ensure that the patients included in the data ever accessed medical transition. As a result, the data, when decoupled from prescribed medications like HRT, is largely unreliable and may not accurately represent the experiences of transgender individuals in Germany.
This seems confused. You begin by talking about "Gender Identity Disorder," which is mainly a term applied to preadolescents who are "gender nonconforming." It has nothing to do with transsexualism (or gender dysphoria, to use the fancy diagnostic term from 50 years ago), which is very rare to begin with and limited to adults and adolescents. I gather unrelated data here have been commingled.
I haven't seen the terms distinguished like this (I'm not an expert). I see the American Psychiatric Association says gender dysphoria replaced "gender identity disorder in DSM-5, presumably in part because of the stigma of the term "disorder."
https://www.psychiatry.org/psychiatrists/diversity/education/transgender-and-gender-nonconforming-patients/gender-dysphoria-diagnosis
"Gender Identity Disorder" has nothing to do with transsexualism.
"Gender dysphoria" is the term for transsexualism going back more than 50 years, with a specific definition.
The DSM was not involved; that directory is designed for laypeople and non-specialists, for disorder-coding purposes. Specialists in the field would not be looking in the DSM, where this didn't even exist 50 years ago.