07-28-2020, 09:10 AM
I’m sure some would find my opinion about this to be offensive as well so for now, I’ll just throw a few other things out there for the sake of discussion.
First of all, the article and full linked paper involve a hypothetical case for the purpose of examining the bioethical concerns involved for medical professionals if they were presented with such a scenario.
For those that haven’t read the linked source, the proposed scenario was what if an 18 year old natal female that “identified” with the nebulous term of non-binary that somehow had been put on puberty blockers at age 11 (which IMO is an ethical concern in itself) was wishing to continue the use of “puberty blockers” so that they could prevent the development of secondary sexual characteristics and basically remain in a prepubertal state indefinitely into adulthood.
Ten of the twelve affiliated contributing authors of this exercise were from Australia. Up until very recently, lengthy and expensive court review and approval was necessary before even properly medically diagnosed legitimate trans youth could be put on so called puberty blockers so this what if scenario is planning for the eventuality that one day such a case may be presented.
That’s really all I’m going to add for now but it should be noted in wide ranging studies with large sample sizes, 80% plus of those claiming to have a “non-binary” identity are biological females and the ratio of girls wishing to transition into boys is double that of natal males going the other way when traditionally just the opposite was true.
This raises the bigger question of what we’re doing to young girls to make them reject womanhood?
First of all, the article and full linked paper involve a hypothetical case for the purpose of examining the bioethical concerns involved for medical professionals if they were presented with such a scenario.
For those that haven’t read the linked source, the proposed scenario was what if an 18 year old natal female that “identified” with the nebulous term of non-binary that somehow had been put on puberty blockers at age 11 (which IMO is an ethical concern in itself) was wishing to continue the use of “puberty blockers” so that they could prevent the development of secondary sexual characteristics and basically remain in a prepubertal state indefinitely into adulthood.
Ten of the twelve affiliated contributing authors of this exercise were from Australia. Up until very recently, lengthy and expensive court review and approval was necessary before even properly medically diagnosed legitimate trans youth could be put on so called puberty blockers so this what if scenario is planning for the eventuality that one day such a case may be presented.
That’s really all I’m going to add for now but it should be noted in wide ranging studies with large sample sizes, 80% plus of those claiming to have a “non-binary” identity are biological females and the ratio of girls wishing to transition into boys is double that of natal males going the other way when traditionally just the opposite was true.
This raises the bigger question of what we’re doing to young girls to make them reject womanhood?
Knowledge is knowing that a tomato is a fruit. Wisdom is not putting it in a fruit salad.