Luna Macrosystems✡️🤖🏳️⚧️starting A Problem in the Pride ERG meeting when a cis gay asks how we talk about anti-trans legislation without sounding political
(to this guy's credit, he didn't disagree with me, but instead was pointing out the very frustrating but natural situation of being a pride ERG that has to be aligned with our company's corporate messaging)
psboyceAnd therein lies something on my mind a lot: to us, this is cut and dry genocide.
But even in California Democrat circles, whether or not kids should transition, or the bar for what you need to do before you can transition, is something they still feel is up for debate.
Perhaps one of the bigger problems, besides an inability to just listen to trans people on issues that impact trans people, is this notion that being trans is something to avoid, a last resort, something that should be an option but only if you really need it.
I remember the same argument about gay marriage, the idea that well maybe it should be allowed because it's not a choice for some people -- not the liberating idea that hey, actually, it's completely fine to be gay even if it were a choice. It's not wrong to be gay. Likewise it's not wrong to be trans. Who cares whether you needed to transition by some bizarre standard of last resort, or whether you just.. wanted to. Or any mix of the above. The ultimate problem underpinning all of these arguments is the idea that being trans is somehow something to avoid if you can.
That's the political part that concerns me. I know for sure I have coworkers who aren't aligned on that, even if they generally want to think of themselves as LGBTQ allies. Even within overwhelmingly left/liberal tech companies, my existence is political.
But even in California Democrat circles, whether or not kids should transition, or the bar for what you need to do before you can transition, is something they still feel is up for debate.
Perhaps one of the bigger problems, besides an inability to just listen to trans people on issues that impact trans people, is this notion that being trans is something to avoid, a last resort, something that should be an option but only if you really need it.
I remember the same argument about gay marriage, the idea that well maybe it should be allowed because it's not a choice for some people -- not the liberating idea that hey, actually, it's completely fine to be gay even if it were a choice. It's not wrong to be gay. Likewise it's not wrong to be trans. Who cares whether you needed to transition by some bizarre standard of last resort, or whether you just.. wanted to. Or any mix of the above. The ultimate problem underpinning all of these arguments is the idea that being trans is somehow something to avoid if you can.
That's the political part that concerns me. I know for sure I have coworkers who aren't aligned on that, even if they generally want to think of themselves as LGBTQ allies. Even within overwhelmingly left/liberal tech companies, my existence is political.
This is getting a lot more attention than I expected for something I threw out there following an awkward call 😅 guess I'm not alone in this
The thing I fear is politics around minors getting affirming care. Every time I post a link to an article in our Pride channel, that feels devasting to me as someone who was forced through natal puberty, I pause and consider how many coworkers probably don't see that as a problem.
To many liberals, teens on blockers/HRT is a debate. An idea that concerns them because they see transitioning as something irreversible one could regret.
But this is a false choice. A choice that betrays their inner feeling, that being trans is less ideal than being cis, if being cis were an option. That it would be better to default -- a choice itself -- to forcing kids through natal puberty, if there's a chance they might be ok being cis. That forcing kids to watch their body develop in irreversible ways, even after they express dysphoria over it, is ok if it could just be a phase.
It's a debate to them, something they view as tricky, because they can't give up the idea that being trans is a last resort.
Being trans has been the most beautiful thing I've embraced in my life. I love the person I've become. The hard part is how hard the world wants to make it. My only regret is everything I didn't get to experience as my true self.
The thing I fear is politics around minors getting affirming care. Every time I post a link to an article in our Pride channel, that feels devasting to me as someone who was forced through natal puberty, I pause and consider how many coworkers probably don't see that as a problem.
To many liberals, teens on blockers/HRT is a debate. An idea that concerns them because they see transitioning as something irreversible one could regret.
But this is a false choice. A choice that betrays their inner feeling, that being trans is less ideal than being cis, if being cis were an option. That it would be better to default -- a choice itself -- to forcing kids through natal puberty, if there's a chance they might be ok being cis. That forcing kids to watch their body develop in irreversible ways, even after they express dysphoria over it, is ok if it could just be a phase.
It's a debate to them, something they view as tricky, because they can't give up the idea that being trans is a last resort.
Being trans has been the most beautiful thing I've embraced in my life. I love the person I've become. The hard part is how hard the world wants to make it. My only regret is everything I didn't get to experience as my true self.
Maier Amsden@LunaRogue As a healthcare guy, I wouldn't say hormone therapy should be the "last resort." I *would say that it's not without risk, which needs to be studied/ understood and carefully weighed. Same with surgery. Everything is risk/ benefit, and cis folks don't see the benefits the same as trans folks. But it's ultimately up to the *patient to decide. That's why there's the issue with minors - they can't legally give "informed consent" - taking on serious risks is a notably "adult" endeavor.
@MaierAmsden Considering the hormones I take are essentially birth control, what's the take on minors having access to birth control then?
@LunaRogue I can't speak to the current understanding of the risks of various agents/ doses given to various populations. I can say that hormonal contraceptives mimic those of pregnancy given to post-pubescent genetic females, which makes it a bit different from trans hormone therapy. But whenever I see a woman who had a stroke in her 20's, she's usually a smoker and taking hormonal contraceptives, so the risk there is not nothing.
@LunaRogue There's an idea that pregnancy is by its very nature an adult situation, which is why there's a sort of carve out for sexually active post-pubescent females. The old story goes, if a 14 year old shows up in the ER in active labor - congrats on prematurely being an adult! You get to consent to medical treatment all on your own!
@MaierAmsden But this is sort of the point -- that before illegalization of trans care for minors happened, doctors, parents, and trans children would be having these risk conversations and deciding what was most appropriate. The state has taken these conversations away from people capable of making those decisions and has decided to ban it outright, regardless of what doctors decide.
It's all risk assessments. For me, the risk of being in HRT would've been significantly lower than the risks I've faced as an adult trying to undo the changes that natal puberty forced.
It's all risk assessments. For me, the risk of being in HRT would've been significantly lower than the risks I've faced as an adult trying to undo the changes that natal puberty forced.
@LunaRogue If a minor and their parents, in consultation with a doctor, agree that the benefits outweigh the risks, governments should f->k right off. The tricky part is when parents decide they know better than their children and gender-affirming providers.
Insecurity Princess 🌈💖🔥@LunaRogue @MaierAmsden More comparable: What's the take on access to growth hormones? That's another risk with irreversible consequences.
In an AMAB child, growth hormones essentially are a catalyst for masculinization. Why is making someone "more cis" not equally on the table with "let's pause for a bit" — let alone even considering "less cis / more trans"?
A child has to actively SEEK puberty blockers, whereas growth hormones are presented spontaneously as an optional path. There's some acknowledgement about risks and effects, but no discussion of gender.
@saraislet @LunaRogue They *should be on par. They're not because of outdated conceptions of gender/ medical inertia.
@MaierAmsden @LunaRogue exactly the problem : /
Alexandra Thorn@saraislet @LunaRogue @MaierAmsden
I'm honestly pretty unhappy to hear that growth hormones would be spontaneously offered as an option for kids that just happen to be shorter than other kids. Is this a universal practice?
Is shortness seen as a defect when there's no evidence of related health problems?
@athorn @saraislet @LunaRogue Not my area of expertise, but I was under the impression that growth hormone was for a measured pituitary/growth hormone deficiency, not just below-average height.
@MaierAmsden
I guess my question is whether the hormone deficiencies cause problems other than small body size.
I guess my question is whether the hormone deficiencies cause problems other than small body size.
@MaierAmsden @athorn @LunaRogue combination: not just below average height, but when general development through puberty is falling several standard deviations "short", that's when they check growth hormone deficiency
Below average height alone is not sufficient
undead enby of the apocalypse@LunaRogue @MaierAmsden the same goes for puberty. Doing nothing is not neutral here, it leads to irreversible changes that are incredibly distressing to trans people. The kids themselves know best, so they should be the ones making an informed decision.
@enby_of_the_apocalypse @LunaRogue That's a sound argument. The only difference is "distress" is harder to measure than death and disability.
Skylar Caulfield 
@LunaRogue this thread is so important, the decision of doing nothing isn't a neutral thing, I also think back and think of how different my life would of been had I felt safe to come out and transition as a child. Right wingers love to say "let kids be kids" but we were denied that!
Timothy Schwinghamer (he/him)@LunaRogue speaking as a person in Canada, I don't understand why Americans' Freedom of Expression doesn't trump the anti-trans & anti-gay laws and the book censorship. Also, why aren't the anti-Black and ant-trans and anti-gay people in the USA charged with harassment and defamation and libel?
@schwinghamer @LunaRogue because discrimination is structural. The state serves the interests of the privileged. That’s not a bug, it’s a feature.
JiSe@LunaRogue This! Plus the scary ignorance of them going "We should discuss this" as if it isn't being used as a spear point to drive in a ton of other things, when D's are ok to yield an inch, they will be driven through by the whole regressive agenda.
synlogic@LunaRogue "cut and dry genocide" <-- I've not heard of that happening. is there a news article you could point at so I can learn more?