The summary:
- The data do not support the claim that there has been a large rise in suicide in young gender dysphoria patients at the Tavistock.
- The way that this issue has been discussed on social media has been insensitive, distressing and dangerous, and goes against guidance on safe reporting of suicide.
- The claims that have been placed in the public domain do not meet basic standards for statistical evidence.
- There is a need to move away from the perception that puberty-blocking drugs are the main marker of non-judgemental acceptance in this area of health care.
- We need to ensure high quality data in which everyone has confidence, as the basis of improved safety for this at risk group of young people.
Regardless of any change in suicide risk, what’s so wrong about calling people what they want to be called?
Gender is a construct anyway. Even sex is less of a binary coin flip and more of a scale. And ultimately society is breaking down, why give a shit. Just have some basic respect for how others live their lives.
Why give a shit?
Because it allows big business, and people in the media to distract the public from what they don’t want them discussing. It also gives airtime to politicians from across the political spectrum a chance to sling shit at one another to distract the public from said politicians falling short of their elected duty to their constituents.
Most people just want a respectful and peaceful existence spending the day doing something they find worthwhile, come home to a roof over their head, food in their bellies, the occasional small luxury item, and if they have kids a good future for them.
How does respecting someone’s self-image prevent your ability to live peacefully?
If you don’t like what’s on TV you can just turn it off…
It doesn’t, in fact respecting their self-image means that they feel welcome. It’s the first law of everything: don’t be a knob-head. Follow that rule and life is more pleasant generally.
Perhaps you misunderstood me.
I guess so, that or you misunderstood me. Just let people be people. Not too hard a concept.
My “who cares” was directed at those thinking respecting others is a problem.
That’s exactly what most people want.
That’s not at odds with the article. The article refutes a claim that there was a surge in suicides due to inability to access puberty blockers. It doesn’t touch on broader subjects like being called what you’d like.
lol so I guess you didn’t read more of the article you posted than the tl;dr section at the top of if which you copy/pasted.
The entire premise in the article of denying any kind of gender-affirming treatment is what I was responding to. Whether or not that translates into a difference in suicide stats, negative perception of gender-affirming treatment prevents the quality of life outcomes that come along with that treatment and further drives people to suicide, but also diminished social acceptance and therefore a lower quality of life.
In other words, suicide isn’t the only negative effect, and it’s can be a more indirect one than a single study like this can show.
Just refer to people the way they want to be referred to and respect their wishes. Isn’t that what we all want?
What? Can you quote any part of the article that tries to deny “any kind of gender-affirming treatment”? Here is the central claim that they’re refuting:
Can you quote any part of the article that conflicts with this statement?
You want me to use your own source to argue with you so you don’t have to read your own source?
Lol nah. That’s on you.
I’m not sure why the hostility? I’ve read the source, and you either didn’t read it or misunderstood it. Nowhere does it say what you’re claiming it says, you’re welcome to disprove that with quotes.
For anybody else reading this, if you doubt that the above commenter misunderstood the article, you can just read it. It’s not very long.
I’m not sure why you think I’m being hostile? I’m simply arguing against the core of the issue, rather than the specific suicide statistic of the article and have stated as much. I just refuse to look through your own source for you.
If you think that’s hostile then maybe you should analyze your emotional reaction to text comments on the internet?
I don’t see where his claim is supported in the article. That’s why I don’t reply to him as it’s a waste of time.
That or you know you’re wrong and don’t want to continue being reminded.