Wednesday, October 7, 2020

The Truth about Transitioning

Two days ago I wrote a post about suing a gender identity clinic in Great Britain. Yesterday, someone wrote a comment, suggesting that for adults there is much to gain and little to lose in transitioning. Since I had already written about the experience of one Leanne Mills, I responded that he was completely full of it.

Today, happily for those who care about reality, Quillette has published an article by a transgendered man, by name of Scott Newgent.  He is not as strongly opposed to transitioning as some of us are, but his experience transitioning should set off alarms.

In this text he describes the medical side of his transition:

During my own transition, I had seven surgeries. I also had a massive pulmonary embolism, a helicopter life-flight ride, an emergency ambulance ride, a stress-induced heart attack, sepsis, a 17-month recurring infection due to using the wrong skin during a (failed) phalloplasty, 16 rounds of antibiotics, three weeks of daily IV antibiotics, the loss of all my hair, (only partially successful) arm reconstructive surgery, permanent lung and heart damage, a cut bladder, insomnia-induced hallucinations—oh and frequent loss of consciousness due to pain from the hair on the inside of my urethra. All this led to a form of PTSD that made me a prisoner in my apartment for a year. Between me and my insurance company, medical expenses exceeded $900,000.

And he comments on the puberty blocking hormone that physicians are handing out, he says, like Tylenol:

Lupron, the hormone blocker some doctors seem intent on giving to kids like Tylenol, isn’t even FDA-approved to treat children with gender dysphoria. (In 2001, the manufacturer pled guilty to fraudulent sales practices with regard to its marketing as a prostate-cancer drug.) We don’t yet know its long-term effects off-label, despite the fact parents have been assured that its effects are safe and even reversible.

What are the long term effects of synthetic hormone therapy? Newgent explains:

Here is what we do know: The long-term use of synthetic hormone therapy shortens lives. Specifically, these medications are associated with an increased risk of heart attacks, pulmonary embolisms, bone damage, liver and kidney failure, mental-health complications, and more. Almost a quarter of hormone-therapy patients on high-dose anabolic steroids (such as the testosterone taken by female-to-male transitioners) exhibit major mood-syndrome symptoms. Between three and 12 percent go on to develop symptoms of psychosis.

As for the mental health outcomes, he concludes with this:

And in this regard, the gold standard is a study of 324 medically transitioned adults, based on 30-year longitudinal data. The authors found that completing sex-reassignment surgery was associated with “considerably higher risks for mortality, suicidal behaviour, and psychiatric morbidity” as compared to the general population. Kids who are suicidal before their transition will likely continue to be suicidal, and the most intense ideation often comes years after transitioning. (Transgender folks themselves sometimes speak anecdotally of a seven-to-10-year trans suicide “itch” observed within the community.)


Sam L. said...

There's crazy stuff going on in the U.S.

Anonymous said...

I suppose it's been said a thousand times, but isn't it contradictory that if you "think" you're a woman or man, you automatically ARE one, but there are all the surgeries and drugs one has to take. But...but...the person already IS a man or woman!

Janszoon said...

Hats off for taking ‘Newgent’ as their surname, though. That was inspired. Almost worth $900,000...

Tracy Coyle said...

I read the post you made a couple days ago - did not comment because what is happening in the UK is being reflected in the US, fortunately not QUITE as badly. The number of people detransitioning is small relative to those transitioning - and it is a good thing. It is called the real life test because it will result in people realizing transition is a mistake. And terrible things happen to a small subset of EVERY medical process/procedure. The argument that it could be avoided by not transitioning at all ignores the benefit it has for many people.

The "truth about transitioning' is a truth for one person - maybe even 10 people, but not for thousands of others. Risk is part of every life.

I do NOT agree with medical transition for minors. I do agree with social transitioning. And I am slowly accepting the idea of male blockers - but not there yet. My biggest problem is that I DO NOT TRUST the gender medical community any more and am also afraid of parents that might be pushing transgenderism on their children. I don't know how to stop such or even expose it when it seems supported by parents/therapists. Kids are looking for help dealing with their issues, simple solutions seldom are.

I am a 62 yr old post-op. I transitioned 30 yrs ago when it was not acceptable or physically safe in most places. I am in a small percentage (10-20%) of the population that never considered suicide, never abused drugs or alcohol. I was part of a well-established gender program at a major US university.

I am biologically male - that can't be changed. I have gender congruency - my mind and body are consistent, something I was not born with - unlike 99% of you. If you want to say it is all in my mind, I agree. Fetal development went haywire for me, I did what is possible medically to address it.

There is a lot wrong with the transactivists promoting an agenda that has less to do with individual rights and wellness and a LOT more to do with identity politics - they do NOT speak for the majority of the community. Politically, I am a classical liberal. I believe the individual is sovereign. Let adults make their choices and deal with their own consequences. Too many people promote a negative agenda because of the consequences of their own choices - and yes, I'd rather err on the side of caution with regards to minors - even though I know in my case, my PERSONAL case, it would have been ok with me then.


Anonymous said...

The difference between you (Tracy) and the current crowd is that they are not living in the shared reality. You are. They say that if you think you are a woman, you are one, right then and there. Surgery/drugs are optional. The person is the other sex no matter what genitals, chromosomes or organs are present. But you don't think that way. You are rational. You aren't like the current Marxists who don't care about the fate of anyone. They just want to foment chaos and confusion. This is just one of the means of accomplishing it.

Tracy Coyle said...


Ignatius Acton Chesterton OCD said...

The transgender movement is a means to an end. It is a brazen attempt to legitimize emotions so as to impose a duty on those one disagrees with.

In so doing, we attack the empathy of the opponent. Which is to say we attack their lack of compassion. Which means we attack them as a human person. Which means we are at war with their viability as a human being in a social sense. And since human beings are inherently social beings, we are threatening them with EVERYTHING that gives meaning. Which is to say, safety. It’s not just a shame or guilt strategy — it is a social marginalization strategy. An aggressive attack. An attack meant to destroy. Ostacization. Total banishment from the tribe, the group, the locus of all that sustains the human person. The human person alone starts talking to beach volleyballs. Social destruction.

Threatening someone with the monicker of being an unfeeling being, devoid of compassion, is a threat to that person’s very humanity. Epithets like “racist!” fit the bill.

We have arrived at a new level of insanity. Though born with male wedding tackle, I FEEL I am a woman. Therefore, you must not only accommodate me in every civil rights sense, but also celebrate my transgender choice, because my choice was not a choice. But I chose to become a woman. I had elective surgery. Cosmetic surgery. Hormone therapy. It was a choice. I wasn’t going to die.

Transgenderism makes no sense outside of feelings, outside of emotions. None. Zero. Nada.

If everyone has a duty to provide ______ based on how I feel, then I am completely in charge of them based on how I feel in the moment. Because of the idea that gender is “fluid,” and I can transition back and forth at whim — with legal claims — means that I am omnipotent based on how I FEEL. In the moment.

Does anyone think this trend ends at gender? I think not. This is an attept to legitimize emotional politics. And if only feelings are the standard, the state powers can pick and choose which feelings are legitimate, and which are not.

This is dangerous. And it’s exactly what the Left wants. And, if this cancer is allowed to spread unabated, it will be our downfall. Our civilization, freedom, liberty. prosperity and wealth CAN disappear in one generation. Need has no season. Emotional people, by definition, are NEEDY.

That wacko neighbor who is emotionally unstable but believes all the “right” things... what if he/she turns against you? In the America that is to come, you’re #%&$ed.

Ignatius Acton Chesterton OCD said...

Tracy, I have a different take from Anonymous @9:30 AM (who is a coward for not putting himself out there, especially on this blog... WAYtoo many Anon posts of late):

Tracy, while I get what you’re laying down, society cannot sensibly or effectively accommodate a less-than-one-percent-of-the-population thing. It’s just not possible.

Your status or viewpoint has been hijacked by evil collectivist politicians for evil collectivist means. You’re a useful prop. They couldn’t care less about you or your feelings.

If you were a pissed-off brown-eyed accordion player on a unicycle, they’d still screw you over. They’d tell you how brown eyes are special, accordions are ignored, and unicycles are ridiculed. In short, they’d tell you you’re a loser. And you belong as a proud member under this tent of marginalized people.

You say you’re a classical liberal, but I’m confident your identity is your defining gesture. No one will ever “get” you. They’ll never “get” your experience. On a quantitative basis, that makes sense. There just aren’t enough of you.

But you are useful to the Left. Your usefulness gets them one step closer to the goal line. And when they cross that goal line, they’ll have everything, and you’ll have your feelings. In other words, you’ll have nothing of lasting value. No assets (and I don’t mean physical/monetary assets) to speak of. Nothing.

I’m sorry, my friend. That sucks.

Tracy Coyle said...


I make every effort to address the fact that the transactivists, the woke speakers that hijack every identity to promote a political agenda, have nothing to say on BEHALF of the community. You are absolutely right there are too few of 'me' and too loud many of them. Unfortunately, being out of the closet, even in this day and age, is NOT good or often, safe.

I am not saying anything new to you and others on our side of the aisle except to say, don't through out the individuals suffering with the activists trying to cash in on it.

I do nothing to support the Left and yet, I can't really dispute your point of being somewhat helpful to them BECAUSE that absolutism of the transsexual's political opposition doesn't help us either. I spoke out against the 'bathroom bills' because I see NO REASON for society to change it's general behavior for less than .1% of the population. I DO expect there can be some individual, personal, at the moment, accommodations. Going to the public bathroom when I was in transition was a horrifyingly terrifying thing that I tried to avoid at all cost - but still had to deal with on occasion (and on a few, ended very, very badly - once in handcuffs).

I strongly oppose 'self identification' as the sole criteria for 'inclusion in the trans community'. I also do not accept 'non-binary, fluid or ....' for use in adding new criteria for special accommodations.

Again, you are right, too few of us and too many of us too afraid to be in the public's eye to counteract the Left's (transactivist's) agenda....

Ignatius Acton Chesterton OCD said...

We’re aligned, Tracy. Cheerio!

Anonymous said...

Dear Ignatius, I am the anonymous who wrote (Female btw). I am probably the anonymous of other posts as well. I am anonymous so that clients of mine don't somehow find me because they wouldn't like it if I was a conservative. You can call it cowardly; I call it pragmatic. I don't attack anyone using anonymity as a cover. I m not certain that your real name is Ignatius Acton Chesterton OCD. Maybe it is, but I doubt it.

What I wrote to Tracy was telling this individual that I do not throw him/her out with the other nutcases. I am saying I would be friends with this person because he/she sounds quite reasonable. If Tracy likes Napoleon, then we can even be best friends. I don't disagree at all with what you wrote; I was just on a different topic altogether.

Still Anonymous

Tracy Coyle said...

Dear Still Anonymous,

I am agnostic about Napoleon! And I understand about your concern via clients - I've lost a couple (one because I was agnostic, another because I was in a lesbian relationship and another because I was/am politically active as a Conservative....can't win for losing!). Still, as I said to someone else, I am public about my transition but it is not commonly known.

BTW, anyone can find me via my name and I welcome contact.