World Professional Association for Transgender Health (WPATH) Files

Which is perfect argument for more and better HSE care, with access to a range of treatments including the ones some would like to ban. Why because self medication is always the worst outcome and denial of treatment inevitably leads there.

They’re not easy to forget, posted about them earlier in the thread:

https://www.thepinknews.com/2019/05/20/gendergp-trans-clinic-moving-spain-uk-suspends-doctors/

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-wales-65136838.amp

I think her and her husband preying on vulnerable people is not only disgusting, it’s wholly unethical, but even if they remained struck off, there are many more suppliers will simply replace them, and it’s not fair to suggest the HSE is tacitly endorsing that sort of thing.

I’m not keen on the way the HSE has effectively attempted to absolve themselves of any responsibility for informing parents about the clinic in Belgium either which accepts international patients on the public healthcare system there, knowing that the standard of aftercare that patients will receive in Ireland upon their return here is practically non-existent.

The HSE disagreeing with Prof. O’ Shea hasn’t prevented him from becoming the National Clinical Lead for Obesity either as part of the Clinical Advisory Group for the HSE -

https://www.hse.ie/eng/about/who/cspd/ncps/obesity/the-team-contact-us/

It’d similarly be a stretch to suggest that a bad relationship doesn’t mean they can’t behave like adults and remain professional about the whole thing, with their primary focus being on healthcare, and not just making everything about themselves.

I bet not many of them think that women only learned to breastfeed after first feeding their babies with crushed-up plant juices though.

Pot, kettle, perhaps?

The fact that many women don't know a lot about their own bodies doesn't mean that men are going to know more about them - quite the opposite. Yes it's a problem that women's bodies are often treated primarily as sex objects for men, and therefore not "nice" to be spoken about openly, but I guarantee that a similar poll for men about women's bodies would give FAR worse results.

Moreover that's also what you were doing, insisting that women's breasts were primarily sex objects and not primarily for feeding babies: anyone who thinks that really knows nothing about human biology.

And of course, women, even those in third world countries with no formal education, actually know lots of things about their bodies from first hand experience, even if they don't always know the scientific explanations behind things: again something that men can't possibly learn from experience. basically, a male gynaecologist knows a lot more than I do about pregnancy and birth - but someone like you?? Gimme a break!!

Because if your argument is that you do know better than most women, to be blunt, the nonsense you come out with proves that you don't.

Gracious me that’s an awful lot of strawman arguments to pick through, if only I were even remotely interested in picking through them.

Essentially, the point being made was that because I’m a man, I couldn’t know anything about breastfeeding or giving birth. That’s just silly, but in order to demonstrate how silly it is requires evidence, which I provided in the form of making the point that there are many women too who don’t have a clue about the fundamentals of their own body. I don’t judge, I really don’t care how they refer to themselves, I’ll still get what they mean, as opposed to being dependent upon either yourself or ceadaoin as the source of my knowledge of women. I’d be well and truly… if I had to resort to that.

Moreover that’s not what I was doing at all, I was refuting your claims of their primary function, and I really don’t need to ask women whether or not they consider providing nutrition for infants is the primary function of their breasts either, not unless I wish to be sucking my next meal through a straw in a hospital bed.

I don’t know that a male gynaecologist actually does know a lot more than you do about pregnancy and birth either, I know you aren’t just a woman, but you also have a medical background, and had you not mentioned it before, I certainly would never have known, but I believe you. I wouldn’t believe everything a doctor tells me just because they’re a doctor, that’s never a good idea, just in case you might think to take that personally. It’s not you, it’s me.

And again, that’s never been my argument, nor was it the point I was making in response to the suggestion that because I’m a man I could know nothing of breastfeeding and giving birth. I just wouldn’t assume like you appear to be doing that all women’s experiences are the same, or Christ even similar would be stretching it. I guarantee you that the two infants who Freddy McConnell gave birth to didn’t go crawling instinctively anywhere, nor did my own child when he was born. As the nurse quickly whipped him up and tried forcing him into my arms I thought “you can’t be fcuking serious?”, but she didn’t appear like she was going to take no for an answer.

I’ve never tried to present myself as an authority on anything. That you’ve consistently chosen to take whatever I have said out of context and pretend as though that’s the point I was making, does not make it my problem.

So your incredibly long posts are what, shooting the breeze?

Have to love how you can mind read everyone's "real" intentions.

Personally, I see a distinction between long posts with actual information, and long posts with a load of word salad.

I’m certain I’m not being over literal, the point being made was that I couldn’t, know anything about breastfeeding or giving birth, as though I ever claimed to in the first place. Frankly I know far more than I either need or want to know about it, which I suspect is true of most people, regardless of their sex. It’s why they’re just not so interested or invested in the process as either yourself or ceadaoin appears to be. It’s why when you make a claim that newborns instinctively attach themselves to their mother’s breast upon entry into the world, you’re leaving out the part where they are assisted in doing so. It’s a small distinction and one not worth falling out over. I’ve no doubt the same observations will be made of breastfeeding men in the literature at some point. ceadaoin is already half-way there by pointing out that it’s natural, innate human behaviour.

I’ve heard of similar experiences from women who have given birth of their experiences of midwives attempting to convince them of the same thing on the basis of it being natural, innate human behaviour, and how those women felt like failures upon being unable to do what they had been told was natural, innate human behaviour. Their infants didn’t die of malnutrition though, unlike the many infants who did during the time of our earliest ancestors.

The reason I produced the statistics from a survey of 2,000 women was to counter the notion that simply because someone is a woman, they are an authority on women, or the opposite of that - simply because someone is a man, they could know nothing of women. That’s not me being literal, it’s a direct inference of the original claim, which was implying that I was attempting to portray myself as an authority on the matters being discussed. That’s just silly, and it didn’t require raising my continuing to live in anyone’s head rent-free to make that point- could’ve easily been made from yesterday when it was pointed out that the reason a 12 year old had a breast augmentation procedure was because her breast was abnormal, and not because of the psychological distress caused by extreme asymmetry. If I didn’t know, I wouldn’t know, and figuring that much out hardly requires me to be an authority on the matter.

I’ve already said as much as you’re saying there about women’s practical knowledge of their own bodies - I don’t care how they refer to themselves, I’ll still know what they mean. I don’t require dictionary definitions nor do I need to look up what constitutes a woman, nor do I need to refer to anyone who IS an authority, to understand what they mean. I’ve never been troubled by a question that has perplexed philosophers, academics, a comedy writer, an author of children’s fiction and shìtty journalists struggling for a story to put food on the table, since the beginnings of human civilisation. Taboo? I think not. It’s just not particularly interesting to most people, and not something I think anyone would wish to discuss while they’re eating. That’s just inappropriate.

The context which they were in was just fine, and at the risk of the old “I know you are but what am I?” level of stupidity, taking what was said out of context and pretending as though I were being literal when I was referring to a point in human civilisation which none of us were around to personally observe, is the very definition of taking something that was said, literally. I don’t take it personally when anyone brings up things I’ve said years ago. As I pointed out to ceadaoin, and the same to you now - not my problem, it’s more bemusing that anyone would still remember anything someone who they didn’t imagine was an authority on the subject would still remember what they said. They obviously took it personally. That was never the way it was intended, but little point in explaining that, lest I be again accused of ‘textbook mansplaining’. That kind of nonsense only works if I bought into the BS ideology from which that term emanates.

LOL, I've just realised you seem to be talking about a post of mine, in which case I can assure you that it was not meant literally, but as explained in my previous post.

It's a vote winner.

Social contagion ...

..exactly.

It was a piss take unless you missed it.

Maybe, just maybe, you can see how ridiculous it is as an explanation for anything.

Your not addressing my point - which is the ludicrous idea of social contagion.

I personally think the growth of anti-trans bigotry is a form of reverse virtue signalling and as such a form of what the right likes to call social contagion.

The huge increase in self identified transgenderism is undoubtedly because in the past people did not feel safe identify as transgender and so lived in the closet for most of their lives. The difference is that we are now a more liberal and accepting society.

Social contagion is a shibboleth of the right.

You don’t think there’s good reason why Marci Bowers, current head of WPATH, which aims to be the authority on transgender healthcare, would speak in such conciliatory tones in an article written about schools withholding information about their children from those children’s parents? Or that Marci would concede that by not entertaining those people who are politically motivated to raise the issue of detransition among a cohort Marci considers part of “my community”, Marci is more concerned about the appearance of their community looking “unified” and how it appears to those outside of that “community” as though they have something to hide?

A trans woman, Bowers is a surgeon and a gynecologist who has both delivered thousands of babies and performed thousands of vaginoplasties; one of her patients was the trans reality star Jazz Jennings. When we spoke, Bowers made an argument I think about often: that progressive taboos around discussing some of the thornier issues involved in treating young people with gender dysphoria, including the reality of detransition, are self-defeating. “We don’t look unified,” she said. “We look like we’re hiding something.”

Not particularly surprising considering that depending upon whom they are speaking to, the message will be different:

Littman later issued a correction that updated the methodology, including a brief description of the websites and forums, and noted that ROGD is not a formal diagnosis. But the concept had already been taken upin books and podcasts—and by politicians—to promulgate the idea that peer pressure and social media are making kids transgender or that being transgender is a form of mental illness. As legislation targeting trans people has reached anall-time high in the U.S., ROGD’s alleged social contagion has been invoked by lawmakers in states such as Missouri,UtahandArkansas to justify banning or restricting gender-affirming care for young people.

“This is just a fear-based concept that is not supported by studies,” says Marci Bowers, president of the World Professional Association for Transgender Health. The term ROGD is being used to “scare people or to scare legislators into voting for some of these restrictive policies that take away options for young people. It’s cruel, cruel legislation.”

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/evidence-undermines-rapid-onset-gender-dysphoria-claims/

I’ve no idea how old you are or where you’re located, but here in Ireland at least, peer influence and popular culture were also used to explain the similar increase in the prevalence of homosexuality among children, taking the same trajectory in that it was mostly young boys at first, then it spread to young girls - by people in Irish society opposed to homosexuality.

Internationally, there were attempts to introduce a defence in cases where the defendant sought to justify their actions on the basis that the victim was homosexual, colloquially known as the “gay panic” defence:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gay_panic_defense

Even managed to make it into the DSM at one point.

EDIT: In case there’s any doubt as to what I may be referring to, I’m old enough to remember when this happened before the Late Late show discussing the topic was broadcast:

https://archive.ph/Flen5

I was a teenager at the time, didn’t turn me gay! 🙄