If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on [email protected] for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact [email protected]

Science Supports Trans People - Here is why

  • 21-06-2022 3:39pm
    Registered Users Posts: 823 ✭✭✭Liberty_Bear

    Psychological support and puberty suppression were both associated with an improved global psychosocial functioning in GD adolescents. Both these interventions may be considered effective in the clinical management of psychosocial functioning difficulties in GD adolescents.

    This study is from the United Kingdom. They followed 101 adolescents who received pubertal suppression at the beginning of the study and 100 adolescents who, for a range of reasons, were deemed by the team not ready to start pubertal suppression and thus did not receive it over the course of the study. Both groups received supportive psychotherapy. Both groups saw improvement in mental health (As explained by Psychology Today

    This study suggests that gender-affirming hormones are a helpful medical intervention for transgender youth. Gender-affirming hormones were found to be associated with decreases in suicidality and improvements in general well-being. This study is especially timely given recent introduction of anti-transgender legislation.

    A significant improvement (P<.05) was found between T0 and T1 in the transgender group in terms of emotional symptoms, behaviour problems, hyperactivity symptoms, pro-social conduct, as well as in the degree of anxiety and depression measured by the SDQ-Cas test, the STAI and the BDI-II scale. There were significant differences in these scales between the transgender group and the controls at T0, however, the scores equalised at T1. The families in this sample of transgender patients provided a very favourable environment according to the scores obtained on the family APGAR scale.


    I am not going to waffle on and on about this. The science is fully there that has evaluated the trans cause and it appears legitimate. The studies (psychiatrists and doctors and in particular that last Spanish study) detail a lower rate of poor mental health with those who can start transitioning to the chosen sex that they desire. Cis teens who related to their biological sex were shown to be happier in comparison to teens who were trans and not taking gender affirming hormones. I am reminded that a lot of the psuedo science that TERFs and others publish is akin to the science that was out with Social Darwinism. Social Darwinism seemed superfically to appear to be a legitimiate science in proving black people were inferior to white people though this was proven later to be total bullshit. Anthropologists have studied the phenomena too over the last century of third genders in cultures most notanly India and the Polynesian cultures (References - & )



  • Registered Users Posts: 134 ✭✭freemickey

    No harm in particular, there are plenty of wacky ideas with large followings, all with their own research and proofs and arguments and conventions and so forth.

    That the popularity of these ideas just so happen to be tied to the popularity of the wild west of the misinformation of the internet is striking. Or not, depending on on your starting point on the sanity scale.

    I'm sure it would take me a whole 3 minutes to find internet proof of pterocatyls running aer lingus.

  • Registered Users Posts: 823 ✭✭✭Liberty_Bear

    Are the ideas supported by empirical evidence ?

    A lot of people wont be able to rebuke the above I posted

  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 823 ✭✭✭Liberty_Bear

    Its better than absolutely no research though what so ever. Remember trans people are a very small portion of the population so it follows any sample size itself would be all relative.

  • Registered Users Posts: 823 ✭✭✭Liberty_Bear

    So as per the post above, the idea that black people are lesser than white people could be correct?

  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 823 ✭✭✭Liberty_Bear

    Not in the least mate, this is the start of a conversation about the evidence we have on front of us.

  • Registered Users Posts: 823 ✭✭✭Liberty_Bear

    As per the links most of the research is laid out and transparent, rather than attacking the credibility of it ad hominem , what from the above is there that would make you think that this is incorrect? The push back against people like neuoscientist Jack Turban has come from mostly quarters where there is no science background, titling that as a push back against Trans Science is a stretch. What I want to know is how, a whole community of psychologists and psychiatrics could be possibly hoodwinked? The DSM that is used to classify mental illness has delisted it. Has been for quite a while. No one appears to be able to attack the science yet...which makes me think most of who appear on these threads are mostly bluster and empty chambers...

  • Registered Users Posts: 39,696 ✭✭✭✭ohnonotgmail

    Are you suggesting that paediatric endocrinology is not a hard science?

  • Evidence is more than a bit strong... theories would be more appropriate.

  • Registered Users Posts: 823 ✭✭✭Liberty_Bear

    The data from which science is based shows us otherwise. Again there is no one refuting the evidence here.

  • Registered Users Posts: 39,696 ✭✭✭✭ohnonotgmail

    you quoted something that happened before most of us here were even born. It has no relevance.

  • No, it doesn't. Psychology, and the social sciences are notorious for needing to revise what research has supposedly "proven".

    And yes, people are disputing your "evidence" here. How many posters have accepted your claims and evidence on the thread?

  • Registered Users Posts: 6,389 ✭✭✭timmyntc

    Has no relevance? Care to explain why?

    Also you conveniently ignored my other 2 links on studies showing that puberty blockers for "gender dysphoric" children leave them with stunted growth and no psychologically better off. Any comment on that?

    And as for Dr John Money, well he defined gender as we know it today. I think its very relevant when people use the term, and advocate for trans-gender status, gender reassignment, gender dysphoria etc. It's all based on his theories and hypotheses about gender not being innate but rather learned. Unless you know more than the leading researchers in the field?

  • Registered Users Posts: 823 ✭✭✭Liberty_Bear

    Now that is what Im talking about in terms of looking at the research

    I can go along with the Tavistock study having read it. The research indicates that there is no significant psychological improvement in those 12 to 15. When you have the Tavistock institute coming out with this and these are the biggest proponents of it then I can respect that as straight from the horses mouth.

    Dr John Money didnt coin the term gender but did coin gender identifcation and gender roles

  • Posts: 3,801 ✭✭✭[Deleted User]

    Except that that kind of therapy is close to being banned. The problem with trans isn’t the well defined GD (gender dysphoria). That’s been around for a while. Gender identity is a different ideology, while the former (GD) sees a mental condition to be rectified, the latter (GI) sees gender identity as trumping biological sex. In fact it sees people who are born into the same sex as their identity as an oppressor class, oppressing those who are in a different sex to their identity. It is anti medicine, and doctors are the bad guys, “assigning” sex at birth, in fact medical transitions are not even recommended, just a nice to have. No medical cert is needed. This is Irish law

    GI promotes self identification, even in children. Therapy to ascertain whether somebody has GD is considered conversion therapy. And of course there being no way to tell, or not, any body of any sex can self identify at will.

  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 823 ✭✭✭Liberty_Bear

    Firstly a thanks for that post, thats a very engaging post I want to respond to (and apologies if I sound patronising , not meant that way)

    The evidence for gender dysphoria is few and far between but one study (and albeit a small sample number) put forward based on the evidence before us, that it is more than likely a genetic trait where there is a mismatch between the brain and the body. The study looked at twins as a whole and drilled down into the finer points. It said (note GID is Gender Identity Disorder)


    Of 23 monozygotic female and male twins, nine (39.1%) were concordant for GID; in contrast, none of the 21 same‐sex dizygotic female and male twins were concordant for GID, a statistically significant difference (P = 0.005). Of the seven opposite‐sex twins, all were discordant for GID.


    These findings suggest a role for genetic factors in the development of GID. Heylens G, De Cuypere G, Zucker KJ, Schelfaut C, Elaut E, Vanden Bossche H, De Baere E, and T'Sjoen G. Gender identity disorder in twins: A review of the case report literature. J Sex Med 2012;9:751–757.

    Whatever about the politics of it, I dont agree that those who are cis (a term I hate) are oppressors as a lived experience is different for most people thus no real comparisons can be drawn.

  • Registered Users Posts: 823 ✭✭✭Liberty_Bear

    I have not seen much to the contrary of what I posted in terms of studies. We have pointed out here that psychological well being improves on gender affirming hormones and puberty blockers dont appear to work and established its no longer classified as a mental illness in cases. There hasnt been a study that has said its all shite..this ad hominem campaign again doesnt attack the evidence.

  • Registered Users Posts: 823 ✭✭✭Liberty_Bear

    I dont think I have ever seen you tackle the science behind it but just repeat mantras ad nauseum , reminded of Animal Farm by George Orwell - four legs good, two legs bad (or whatever is equally as applicable in this case). At any point feel free to post the facts and engage in the science.

  • Registered Users Posts: 823 ✭✭✭Liberty_Bear

    And Science doesn't support or reject anything. It's a method of inquiry.

    Science is the basis of drawing conclusions from observations and / or experiments

    I dont want to get into the habit of correcting you every time ...

  • Registered Users Posts: 2,623 ✭✭✭donaghs

    Are you sure this wasn't "Political Science"? e.g. "gender-affirming hormones".

    Actually Political Science is a serious discipline. This sounds more like a fore-gone conclusion.

    Always suspicious when someone talks about what "the science" says.

    Nonetheless, if this is an independent and verifiable study, it does add weight to the argument in favour of these treatments.

    On the other hand, these treatments eventually become irreversible, which is a huge price to pay if someone decides they didn't make the right choice. Is that kind of harm worth the other benefits?

  • Registered Users Posts: 823 ✭✭✭Liberty_Bear

    And Orwell also painted out the hypermasculinised society that existed in 1984 with all male Pigs at the top table running an you really want to tell us that he speaks to the true nature of equality?

  • Registered Users Posts: 823 ✭✭✭Liberty_Bear

    I thougt the study posted above on the Tavistock piece about how puberty blockers dont work was quite interesting, indeed Ive my own reservations about them in a sense. The science from my purview is independent, there is no stigma attached to it and if it is not independently reviewed then its open to further enquiry sans ad hominem attacks . I understand very few regret transitioning but there are a small number who do so yes that has to be taken account of .

  • Advertisement