World Professional Association for Transgender Health (WPATH) Files

Personally, I'd have zero issue with men who have had genital reassignment surgery using womens bathrooms, changing rooms etc however I absolutely 100% have an issue with men that are still physically intact using these facilities.

No doubt at all that some of these people pose zero risk to females and they just want to go about their business but on the flip side, there is also no doubt that some of them ARE predatory and DO pose a danger to women in such vulnerable spaces.

Yes.

For some reason, sexual assault of women in mixed spaces is regularly portrayed by trans activists as a bigoted white woman/Karen fake problem in western countries, but when the same problem comes up as a reason why women and girls are assaulted in refugee camps, there doesn't seem to be any ideological objection to saying so.

Perhaps the mainly white males objecting to such claims are not nearly as offended at the idea that male refugees are likely to assault women as they are by the idea that men like them do so too?

The radically simple way to make female refugees safer from sexual assault: decent bathrooms

https://qz.com/692711/the-radically-simple-way-to-make-female-refugees-safer-from-sexual-assault-decent-bathrooms

When a safe place to wash can be a life-changing thing.

Probably why it's (still) a war-crime to house male and female prisoners of war together.

When it comes to the current cohort we just don't know what's going to happen.

Ahh we kinda do though:

https://www.hcplive.com/view/suicide-risk-reduces-73-transgender-nonbinary-youths-gender-affirming-care

That’s why some countries, notably apart from the US of course, have decided to implement clinical trials under the auspices of their national public health authorities. In the US it’s pretty much a matter for each State, which means they can introduce laws banning the provision of puberty blockers to minors, effectively ending their treatment.

It’s those figures that haven’t been accounted for yet, but stopping treatment is obviously not the same thing as either regretting the treatment itself, or that the patient has chosen to take steps to detransition (or as some people refer to it ‘retransition’, which is not the same as those who transition again at a later stage).

The 1% figure is bandied about for no other reason other than it’s convenient. There are no reliable statistics that provide evidence one way or another of anything. For example most of the studies are done on patients in the respective countries public healthcare systems, and little is known of patients (or their parents) availing of private healthcare, sometimes covered by private healthcare insurers, more often not. It also doesn’t include the statistics for those people who obtain hormones unlawfully.

At any rate, the whole question of statistics around detransition rates are irrelevant to the question of whether or not it is ethical to withhold, or provide treatment which includes puberty blockers, in children with a diagnosis of gender incongruence.

Some of the medical professionals are open about the kids who detransition need to take responsibility for their actions in transitioning so how that's going to work out in their minds is unknown.

In whose minds, the minds of the medical professionals who are open about the idea that children who detransition need to take responsibility for their actions, or the minds of the children who detransition? If it’s the medical professionals you mean - probably not going to work out very well for them. They have a professional and legal duty to their patients, whereas children are under no such obligation, regardless of the opinions of a few in the medical profession who behave like stroppy teenagers because they have difficulty in communicating with their patients.

But that’s not saying this?

There's other studies which don't show an improvement in mental health after transition.

I totally get that it’s the first study that comes to mind, but it doesn’t support the argument that there was no improvement in mental health after transition, and no changes in psychological function is a positive result!

What the study does say in relation to mental health is this:

The paper, ‘Short-term outcomes of pubertal suppression in a selected cohort of 12 to 15 year old young people with persistent gender dysphoria in the UK’, shows that overall patient experience of changes on gonadotropin releasing hormone analogues (GnRHa) treatment (commonly called ‘puberty blockers’) was positive and there were no unexpected adverse events. Those expected adverse effects reported (headaches, flushes, fatigue, etc) were mainly mild.

The study identified little change in psychological functioning, but the experience of treatment as reported in interviews was positive for most. The majority reported feeling happier and having better relationships with family and peers once treatment had begun. However, some reported negative changes, which were largely related to the anticipated side effects.

https://gids.nhs.uk/research/early-intervention-study/

They spent 8 years in discussions about the study beforehand with clinicians from other countries, then ended up with a 3 year study from which they only had data for 14 patients. I’d say their conclusion that more research is required, is something of an understatement.

A victory for common sense. When a person is legally an adult let them make whatever decisions they want.