Jesse Singal's Talk on Youth Gender Medicine at UCLA School of Law Now on YouTube

I was out of town, or else I'd have much enjoyed being there as well; but I'm very glad it took place, thanks to the newly formed UCLA chapter of Heterodox Academy. I am told there were no disruptions.

Some UCLA student groups condemned the event, saying they were "disappointed by UCLA's decision to allow [the] event," offering some substantive criticisms of Singal's position, and saying "Public debate is important, but we cannot debate people's humanity. Transgender students should be able to attend class without having to hear their very existence debated in an adjacent classroom."

I don't think anything Singal said suggested he cast any doubt on transgender people's "humanity," or suggested that they should not or do not "exist[]." But whatever one might think about that, UCLA had no option but to "allow" the event: As a public institution that has opened up a limited public forum for events put on by various groups (whether student groups or, as with the Heterodox Academy chapter, faculty groups), UCLA is forbidden by the First Amendment from excluding speakers based on their viewpoints and (to quote the condemnation, "dangerous ideas"), whether on youth gender medicine or on other topics.

Comments

[Brett Bellmore]

"offering some substantive criticisms of Singal's position"

"we cannot debate people's humanity. Transgender students should be able to attend class without having to hear their very existence debated in an adjacent classroom."

So, what were the substantive criticisms, then?

[Eugene Volokh]

See the groups' statement; some of the pages are focused on substantive criticisms.

[Brett Bellmore]

I don't have an instagram account, so all I see is the request that I read their statement.

[Sam Bankman-Fried]

Ok boomer.

[Brett Bellmore]

I was a bit under the weather yesterday, but I eventually figured it out. I'm blaming it on the Benadryl.

I wouldn't say they're totally devoid of substantive arguments. Mostly, yeah, but not totally.

Page 1: They complain that, under the guise of airing both sides, the university aired both sides.

Page 2: They complain that Singal doesn't ignore people who had a bad experience with 'gender affirming' treatment.

Page 3: They complain that some people who detransition have wrongful motives.

Page 4: "Disagreeing with us is denying that we're human, or exist!"

Page 5: They complain that people who disagree with them have political representation, too.

Page 6: They brag about having coopted the AMA.

Page 7: They accidentally reveal that UCLA Law has some kind of massive quota for alphabet soup people.

I think that about sums it up.

[Nige]

As a group of people under attack from a reactionary political movement, that mostly sounds right. 'Jews are bad because they killed Jesus' is certainly one side of an argument, but who the fuck needs to hear it, or platform it? Substitute any other group or minority and the reasons people have for hating them.

[Brett Bellmore]

Understand, as I commented below, that this guy is NOT the opposition. Not remotely. He's on their side, with reservations.

If they can't even tolerate reservations, that's amazingly intolerant.

[Nige]

No, you don't get to say who's on their side. If he has managed to alienate all the trans people and their supporters, he can't claim to be on their side.

[Abdul Abulbul Amir]

He alienated the hard core extremists, who are only satisfied with unwavering adherence to dogma.

He sounded quite in favor of gender affirming care for those that would benefit, but critical of poor quality protocols and sloppy research.

[Lee Moore]

Nige is a bit of a Leninist. Anything other than full on instant obedience to the party line is counter revolutionary and rates you “enemy.”

There is no difference between a Socialist Revolutionary and the Black Baron.

[Nige]

Oh, I'm sorry, we're supposed to be colllegial with idiots now, are we?

'Anything other than full on instant obedience to the party line is counter revolutionary and rates you “enemy.'

This says more about how you view disagreement than anyone else. Hey, how many Republican politicians affirm that Biden won the election?

[Brett Bellmore]

Well, we try to be collegial with you, though it is admittedly difficult.

[Nige]

That would be funny if you didn't keep inventing paranoid conspiracies about us while ignoring the authoritarianism of Trump and the GOP and weren't currently labeling any and every criticism of Israel as anti-semitic. That might fit with your *idea* of collegiality.

[Lee Moore]

A bit of a dyspeptic Leninist, it would appear. Though to be fair they're seldom sunny.

[Nige]

Better than a despotic one, like yourselves.

[Malvolio]

some of the pages are focused on substantive criticisms.

True but the inclusion of such eye-wateringly anti-substantive remarks like “public debate is important but [made-up nonsense]” make me very reluctant to listen to the sensible stuff.

[Brett Bellmore]

What struck me is that the level of dissent here was so milquetoast as to almost be over the top, particular the the introduction. The complaint here is essentially that these people aren't 100% on board with the trans agenda, only 95%.

This isn't the other side. Not remotely. It's their side, with minor reservations. And they STILL couldn't tolerate it!

[Nige]

Given the rabid anti-trans hatred on the right, it's a bit rich to demand that trans people accept someone they *claim* is only 5% anti-trans. 'Look at all those people calling you groomers and passing laws against you! Why can't you be more open to Singal's tedious and dishonest concern-trolling?'

[Joe_dallas]

Nige 9 mins ago
Flag Comment Mute User
Given the rabid anti-trans hatred on the right, it’s a bit rich to demand that trans people accept someone they *claim* is only 5% anti-trans.

Nige - you comment is a prime example of falsely accusing a person of hating trans individuals instead of discussing the merits.

[Nige]

Who have I falsely accused? I was referring to Brett's comment.

[Joe_dallas]

Nige 11 mins ago
Flag Comment Mute User
"Who have I falsely accused? I was referring to Brett’s comment."

Nige - you repetitively falsely accuse everyone who question your agenda driven treatment of the mentally ill suffering from transgender of hating trans individuals. Those accusations are made with zero basis. It demonstrates that you cant debate the merits so you resort to falsely accusing people.

[Nige]

That's because every time I've enountered someone who does, they are. Nobody who isn't anti-trans would want to blithely toss decades of carefully established and hard-won treatment out the window. That's just spite.

[Lee Moore]

Why can't we debate people's humanity ? If folk can come up with new ideas about what constitutes a "man" or a "woman" it seems to me that what constitutes a "human" is available for discussion too. Indeed it is already discussed in the context of abortion.

[Brett Bellmore]

Of course we could debate the topic. The problem here is that they pretend that failing to agree with them is denying that they're human. Which is just crazy, but I guess you start with crazy, you end with crazy.

[Frank Drackman]

Much easier to chop off a penis than reattach one.
Just ask John Wayne Bobbit's Surgeon.

Frank

[Sam Bankman-Fried]

Wise men tuck.

[mydisplayname]

It's easier to dig a hole than build a pole.

[Mitch]

I wish I had known about this; I would have attended. I guess the Law School publicizes its preferred events only.

[SimonP]

Dropping the needle on his presentation, I caught a bit where he decried the "liberal media and academic environment" for making it impossible to discuss these issues civilly, which does not inspire confidence in the rest of what he may be saying.

[Buddy Bizarre]

If you don't know Jesse you might be surprised to find he's a member of the left, perhaps even the progressive left. However his criticism of the lack of adequate studies in gender medicine has made him somewhat of a pariah. You should listen to the podcast he does with Katie Herzog. It's called 'blocked & reported'. A lot of it is about Internet bs, but they cover gender drama as well. It would give you a better idea of where he comes from

[SimonP]

My complaint isn't that he is or isn't "a member of the left." I don't care whether he's left or right, for or against trans issues. What I care about is not wasting my time on sophomoric arguments or complaints like, "Waaah, I can't say what I want because the leftists in the media don't like it."

I don't care much for Joe Rogan-style contrarianism.

[Brett Bellmore]

"sophomoric arguments or complaints like, “Waaah, I can’t say what I want because the leftists in the media don’t like it.” "

Complaining about censorship is sophomoric?

[apedad]

Complaining about censorship when there is no censorship IS sophomoric.

[Joe_dallas]

What he was complaining about was putting off limits of discussing the merits of the mental illness and the best treatment and instead accusing anyone objecting to the current treatment as being a person who hates trans.

[Nige]

Oh, non-medical people trying to change the medical consensus, how authoritative, and it happens to match the baseles claims of the anti-trans crowd – nobody would give him the time of day if he was opining on the merits of brain surgery techniques.

[Joe_dallas]

Nige - you lack the medical expertise to evaluate the quality of the medical care.

As jesse Singal noted in the lecture, the medical science/medical consensus in support of the current trans treatment is astonishingly weak. in fact the methodology in the studies as noted around the 30 minute mark is borderline academic fraud.

[Nige]

So do you, so does Jesse Singal. In fact the only people with authoritative opinions are the relevant medical practitioners and those who undergo the treatment. It's funny how with all the whining about one 'side' being silenced they're the side that rarely get quoted by anyone.

It's not especially weak at all. In fact it's massively stronger and more well-supported than any of the concern-trolls or anti-trans critics.

[Bruce Hayden]

No it isn’t. It was a manufactured consensus, very similar to that we saw with the COVID-19 vaccines. Only now, after the damage has been done, is the alternative view, that the vaccines were not well thought out, not well tested, were quite dangerous, etc finally coming out. Turns out that the “consensus” was manufactured from the top, by our public health organizations, led by Drs. Fauici, Collins, etc. They orchestrated the consensus letters from “experts”, kept alternative papers from being published, and worked closely with social media companies like Twitter, FB, etc, to censure vaccine “misinformation”.

We are starting to see the dam breaking with gender affirming health care too. Countries that used to be at the forefront in this area are pulling back, as well as the medical facilities in this country that were similarly in the lead in the past. There are studies out now showing that mental health may improve short run, but it’s significantly worse after a decade or so than if they never had had the gender affirming care. And why not? Very often, the patients receiving this care are rendered sterile. That means no children of their own. No genetic legacy. And then there is the problem of transgendered (invariably F2M) being prominent in recent white on white mass shootings. What did they expect shooting someone with a female wired brain full of testosterone?

Frankly, I don’t care what any adult does in this realm, as long as they don’t harm anyone else (that also means keeping functioning males out of female prisons, and out of female sports). Several years ago, a fraternity brother’s kid, a senior in college, transitioned to the opposite sex. It was hard on their father, but they were 21, and capable of making the decision themselves. But that isn’t where the battle lines have been drawn - which is with teenagers, younger than the age of consent. Their brains won’t fully develop until their 20s, and the place that matures last is judgment. Many girls have a hard time with puberty. They then get through it, adapt to it, and are fine. The ones who start hormone treatment, or even breast removal, or gender reassignment surgery, can’t ever be normal. It’s a mental health issue, first and foremost, and I think that it should be treated as such, with counseling, if necessary, at least until the age of consent. By then, the girls who were just having a hard time accepting their maturing bodies will likely mostly been weeded out.

[David Nieporent]

Nige – you lack the medical expertise to evaluate the quality of the medical care.

Nige may indeed. But the irony meter just exploded, given that this comment is coming from someone who pretends to be an expert on every medical issue discussed.

[Kleppe]

Surely it isn't your position that if you are exposed to their speech there can't have been any censorship?

[Brett Bellmore]

I expect his argument would be more along the lines of, "Only the government can censor."

To which I'd respond, only the government can violate the 1st amendment. Anybody in a position to block publication or speech can "censor".

[SimonP]

Or it could be somewhat less facile and designed served up to provide you an easy knock-down response, along the lines of:

Dude was speaking at the UCLA at the invitation of a campus group. How is he censored? What platform does he deserve, that he lacks?

[Brett Bellmore]

Dude was talking at least in part about research being censored, or did you miss that?

[SimonP]

I'm interested in arguments, not grievances.

It may surprise you, Brett, that there is an entire domain of intellectual inquiry where "truth" is deliberated through the use of reason and factual evidence, and not simply through the petulant appeals to emotion that characterize so much of our politics and, apparently, your media diet.

I'm open to whatever well-researched, valid arguments Singal may actually have. I'm just skeptical that he has any, and am disinclined to give his 45-minute presentation a fair hearing, when he views it as rhetorically helpful to complain about "censorship" of his views.

[Brett Bellmore]

It wouldn't surprise me one bit. I'm just concerned that it's shrinking.

[SimonP]

This comment is ironic insofar as you're a key part of the problem.

[Noscitur a sociis]

I’m just skeptical that he has any

Why?

[SimonP]

I think I've explained why.

I'm not going to sit down and let a 90 minute video occupy my attention, unless I think some value can be derived from it. So I hopped around to see what he might be saying in various segments. One bit was him setting up an argument that a study was shaped to reach a particular conclusion. Another was him complaining about "liberal media and academia." Never mind the obnoxious messaging conveyed by a group calling itself the "Heterodox Academy" (itself something of a curious moniker).

There's obviously more to his presentation than the bits that I dropped in on. But I have to decide whether fully engaging is worth my time. Based on what I gathered, I am disinclined to expect that the rest will be anything other than a bad-faith presentation of selected evidence that would have to be closely reviewed before it could be relied upon.

[Vryedni]

I believe Singal is liberal by most measures, though on this topic obviously an apostate.

[ETA: Buddy Bizarre beat me to it.]

[Buddy Bizarre]

If you don't know Jesse you might be surprised to find he's a member of the left, perhaps even the progressive left. However his criticism of the lack of adequate studies in gender medicine has made him somewhat of a pariah. You should listen to the podcast he does with Katie Herzog. It's called 'blocked & reported'. A lot of it is about Internet bs, but they cover gender drama as well. It would give you a better idea of where he comes from.

[Nige]

Doesn't really matter what he's a member of, it's the transphobic reactionary right that champions him.

[Joe_dallas]

Nige 30 mins ago
Flag Comment Mute User
Doesn’t really matter what he’s a member of, it’s the transphobic reactionary right that champions him.

Nige - Another unsupported accusation against someone that points out the weakness of the supposed studies supporting the current agenda driven fad treatment. You continue to resort to false accusations. If the treatment was as good as the activists claim, then the medical profession would not be backing off your preferred treatment

[Nige]

'If the treatment was as good as the activists claim, then the medical profession would not be backing off your preferred treatment'

It's the medical profession that claim it's good and effective. Activists just highlight that in order to prevent anti-trans reactionaries persecuting them. Republicans passing laws prohibiting treatment is not the medical profession 'backing off,' it's the persecution of a minority.

[David Nieporent]

Republicans passing laws prohibiting treatment is not the medical profession ‘backing off,’

Right, but Republicans aren't passing laws in Europe. So you handwave away what's happening there with completely imaginary religious right bogeymen.

[Nige]

I realise the Atlantic Ocean is large, but it's hardly large enough to hide the fact that Europe has it's own 'Republicans.'

[Joe_dallas]

https://www.tabletmag.com/sections/science/articles/finland-youth-gender-medicine

[Joe_dallas]

https://www.bmj.com/content/380/bmj.p382/rr-10

Rapid Response:
Author's reply to responses to Gender dysphoria in young people is rising—and so is professional disagreement
Dear Editor

Gender affirming care is frequently referred to as uncontroversial, evidence-based, even lifesaving. As Kristensen, Menkes, and Huntington point out, these claims represent the consensus of several medical societies. However there is also dissent that cannot be dismissed as ideological or political. Finland[1] and Sweden[2] have reviewed the evidence base and are restricting hormonal and surgical treatments in minors. Norway recently released a report recommending a review of national guidelines.[3] England is also in the process of a review and in an interim report emphasised the lack of high quality evidence. .

[Joe_dallas]

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3043071/

[Joe_dallas]

https://www.genderclinicnews.com/p/in-the-dark

Swedish psychiatrist and researcher Professor Mikael Landén, who was involved in Sweden’s 2021 systematic review of the evidence base for medicalised gender change with minors, told Zembla that “the studies in this area [of youth gender dysphoria] are of low quality and would not be accepted as evidence in other areas [of medicine].”

[Nige]

Trans people have been crying out for more research for decades, now that paucity of research is being weaponised against them, despite the fact that what evidence exists supports the current treatment, and reactionary parties are all too happy to comply with reactionary demands.

[Joe_dallas]

https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/0092623X.2022.2150346

[Joe_dallas]

Gender-Affirming Care Is Dangerous. I Know Because I Helped Pioneer It.’
My country, and others, found there is no solid evidence supporting the medical transitioning of young people. Why aren’t American clinicians paying attention?

By Riittakerttu Kaltiala

October 30, 2023

[Joe_dallas]

https://segm.org/Denmark-sharply-restricts-youth-gender-transitions

[Nige]

Congrats, you're succesfully persecuting a minority with reactionaries from Europe. Quite a bit of history there.

[Joe_dallas]

Jesse Singal's presentation hit home - you are exactly the type activist he described - very much the ill informed activist

[Nige]

Yes, he would go on about that sort of thing in order to avoid actual trans people and medical experts as much as possible.

[Joe_dallas]

https://www.france24.com/en/live-news/20230208-sweden-puts-brakes-on-treatments-for-trans-minors

[Absaroka]

I watched it, and recommend it highly.

As an aside on science publishing in general, during the Q&A he brought up an idea I hadn't heard before, that journals make the decision to publish before the results are in. The scientists say we're going to run experiment X, analyze it in this way, and the journal agrees to publish regardless of the results. That removes a lot of the incentive to p hack and so on.

You still want room to publish some exciting new study with unexpected results, but consider, say, a proposal to do a careful study on whether some particular gender dysphoria treatment protocol works. You want to design a good study, and the results are interesting whether the study finds treatment X helpful or harmful. When you wait to see the results before deciding whether to publish, you risk that one side of the debate is getting short shrift.

[Brett Bellmore]

The problem is, at this point, one side of the debate getting short shrift isn't considered a risk, it's considered an objective.

[Joe_dallas]

He also made a very good point around the 30-32 minute mark regarding the quality of the studies supporting the transgender treatment. Basically pointing out the extreme weakness of the methodology of the studies. One example being a study with a conclusion the opposite of the appendix of the study, a second study with only 6 teens in the control group. All of which are highly cited for the purpose of promoting transgender treatment.

Likewise, I have frequently pointed how the multitude of studies promoting the current treatment of transgender are extremely weak with obvious methodological flaws. In spite of the obvious weakness in the studies, certain activists constantly promote the studies as proof of the benefit and accuse anyone pointing out the flaws as hating individuals suffering from the mental illness

[SimonP]

There are various inferences we could try to draw from having shown that various studies purporting to "prove" that gender-affirming care can help transgender teens are, in fact, inadequate.

One: More and better research needs to be done to see whether that gender-affirming care can help transgender teens.

Two: While the research on gender-affirming care remains inconclusive, we should consider using other therapies for addressing underlying health concerns, rather than assuming that gender-affirming care will solve them.

Third: We should halt gender-affirming care for transgender minors until we can gather more evidence that it achieves beneficial results for them.

Fourth: We should conclude that gender-affirming care is, in fact, harmful in some or even most cases.

What does Singal argue? What is your takeaway? Which inferences are actually valid?

[Joe_dallas]

SimonP 2 mins ago Flag Comment Mute User There are various inferences we could try to draw from having shown that various studies purporting to “prove” that gender-affirming care can help transgender teens are, in fact, inadequate.

Two: While the research on gender-affirming care remains inconclusive, we should consider using other therapies for addressing underlying health concerns, rather than assuming that gender-affirming care will solve them.”

Simon – that is a point I have made multiple times. The kids are suffering from a mental illness and / or multiple mental illnesses. Its the mental illness that should be treated, not the gender confusion. The gender confusion in most cases is likely driven by the mental illness and not the driver of the mental illness.

As noted early in the presentation, most of the kids are suffering from multiple mental health issues.

[ObviouslyNotSpam]

That is my conclusion as well.

[Brett Bellmore]

As mentioned in the presentation, the original 'gender affirming treatment' was initially restricted to people with longstanding gender dysphoria and little or no secondary mental issues. This was known as "the Dutch Protocol". That's where the original claim that the treatment improved things derived from.

It wasn't remotely followed when the practice migrated to the US.

So even if the Dutch protocol had reliably shown positive results, that finding wouldn't be applicable to gender 'transition' as practiced in the US.

And there's severe doubt that the Dutch protocol actually did reliably show positive results. Here's that SEGM report that the presentation referenced. It recounts the problem with their studies saying it was successful.

Note that what SEGM recommends is going back tracking down all the original participants, and rigorously doing a study of long term results. Not just assuming the treatment was bad.

[Joe_dallas]

Brett - thanks for the link

The weak methodology used the pro gender affirming studies should be apparent to everyone that wants to address the issues honestly. The problems highlighted by SEGM run through the multitude of studies, low response rates, relatively short follow up periods (often with means and median follow up periods less than 3-5 years), and other problematic issues.

[Nige]

If the results were negative you wouldn't go trashing the methodologies. But because they're overwhelmingly positive, they must be destroyed!

[Joe_dallas]

Nige you keep referring to studies with positive results which are highly cited by the advocates.

I object to those studies because an honest evaluation of those studies do not have actual positive results. listen to the lecture at the 30-32 min mark - it certainly would help your education on the subject

Joe_dallas 7 hours ago
He also made a very good point around the 30-32 minute mark regarding the quality of the studies supporting the transgender treatment. Basically pointing out the extreme weakness of the methodology of the studies. One example being a study with a conclusion the opposite of the appendix of the study, a second study with only 6 teens in the control group. All of which are highly cited for the purpose of promoting transgender treatment

[Nige]

No, you object to this studies because they show treatment to be effective, which is against your preferred political culture war stance of hating trans people and depriving them of treatment. You can hardly do studies on suppressed treatments, can you?

[Joe_dallas]

Nige - I object to the studies because the falsely claim the treatment is effective. I and multiple others have pointed out the falacies of the conclusions.

[Nige]

They do not falsely claim that, they show that according to the best current knowledge, it is effective. You have NOTHING that shows otherwise.

[Abdul Abulbul Amir]

Nige,

I'm not a statistics whiz, but a control group of six is bupkiss. It is not a control group, but rather six anecdotes.

[Nige]

Yeah so? He didn’t pick that as an exemplar for nothing, did he? He used it to furrow his brow in 'concern.' It’s all data, and the data overall is of positive outcomes.

[Joe_dallas]

There is an oft-repeated statistic in the world of pediatric gender medicine that only one percent or less of young people who transition subsequently detransition. The studies asserting this, too, rest on biased questions, inadequate samples, and short timelines. I believe regret is far more widespread. For example, one new study shows that nearly 30 percent of patients in the sample ceased filling their hormone prescription within four years.
Continuation of Gender-affirming Hormones Among Transgender Adolescents and Adults
Christina M Roberts, David A Klein, Terry A Adirim, Natasha A Schvey, Elizabeth Hisle-Gorman
The Journal of Clinical Endocrinology & Metabolism, Volume 107, Issue 9, September 2022, Pages e3937–e3943, https://doi.org/10.1210/clinem/dgac251
Published: 22 April 2022

[Joe_dallas]

The Myth of “Reliable Research” in Pediatric Gender Medicine: A critical evaluation of the Dutch Studies—and research that has followed
E. Abbruzzese,Stephen B. Levine &Julia W. Mason
Pages 673-699 | Published online: 02 Jan 2023
Cite this article https://doi.org/10.1080/0092623X.2022.2150346 CrossMark Logo

[Joe_dallas]

Nige - in summary - I have pointed out with the various studies demonstrating that the so called medical experts promoting transgender treatment are activists with an agenda. You can do better than parroting discredited studies with dubious methodology to peddle your activists agenda.

There is far greater harm with the current treatment which prevents any possibility of the afflicted to returning to a normal life.

[Nige]

'I believe regret is far more widespread'

People who aren't trans seem to disproportionately regret trans people getting treatment, yes.

'There is far greater harm with the current treatment'

Yes because it lets trans people get treatment, which for some reason harms you, personally.

[Joe_dallas]

Nige -
I gave you 11 studies to review
Brett gave you 1 or 2
The presentation gave 4-5 studies to review

Get informed instead of being an ill informed activists wanting to create harm for those suffering the mental illness -

Are you still pretending transgender is not a mental illness so you can justify the evil you wish to inflict

[Joe_dallas]

Recommendation of the Council for Choices in Health Care in Finland (PALKO / COHERE Finland)
Medical Treatment Methods for Dysphoria Related to Gender Variance In Minors.

This one is a pdf - so no link available

[SimonP]

Simon – that is a point I have made multiple times.

No, you have imported an important additional assertion into my Point Two. Specifically:

The kids are suffering from a mental illness and / or multiple mental illnesses. Its the mental illness that should be treated, not the gender confusion. The gender confusion in most cases is likely driven by the mental illness and not the driver of the mental illness.

Showing that the science "for" gender affirming care does not yet prove that is beneficial may suggest that underlying mental health issues need to be addressed other ways, but it does not prove anything about the relationship of gender dysphoria and other mental illnesses.

For what it's worth, I actually believe your position is quite plausible. It is consistent, at any rate, with someone I know, who came out late in their thirties as trans after a lifetime of dealing with childhood-induced trauma and abuse. They came out as "trans" after a variety of other therapies proved unable to address their problems, and I am not altogether sure that transitioning has solved them. But we need the science, not my anecdotes. (I also know several perfectly well-adjusted trans people.)

[Nige]

‘we should consider using other therapies for addressing underlying health concerns,’

Based on no evidence that such an approach would be an effective treatment, versus the existing evidence about current treatment which does.

‘Its the mental illness that should be treated, not the gender confusion’

Ultimately it’s about depriving people of treatment for no other reason than the right has decided to persecute trans people.

[Noscitur a sociis]

I’d say that Singal’s primary focus is your number one. He would probably fit within your number two to an extent, but definitely feels that gender-affirming care is indicated in at least some cases.

[Nige]

'some cases;

Yeah, he really is all about concern-trolling treatment out of existence.

[Old Smokin' Egg]

I am a brilliant free-verse poet—the kind of poetic talent that only comes along once every few centuries, if that often. However, certain hate-filled individuals have claimed that my sentiments are trite, my metaphors are awkward, and that my command of the English language isn't what it should be.

Since being one of the greatest poets ever to walk the earth is central to my identity, the spiteful expressions of these individuals should clearly be suppressed. Commentary on my works is certainly acceptable, but not if it denies my existence by suggesting that I'm anything less than a major benefactor of humanity.

[Lee Moore]

“we cannot debate people’s humanity. Transgender students should be able to attend class without having to hear their very existence debated in an adjacent classroom.”

I have some sympathy with this. If I was attending a class on Renaissance Art and I could hear the lecturer in the adjacent classroom going on about calculus, loud enough for me to hear, I should have a word or two to say about the soundproofing.

[Brett Bellmore]

I'd have some sympathy for it if I really thought the panel was so loud it was interfering with neighboring classes.