Well, thank you all for joining us for this panel.
We're going to have Dr. Katherine Welch from our previous panel, Dr. Kim Nguyen, and Dr.
James Lindsay from our private panel, Global Health.
He's an author, mathematician, and political commentator.
So the panel is called the Medical Case
Against Transitioning Children.
But before we go into the actual case,
I'll have Catherine give us some definitions.
Because I think we have an idea what transitioning is.
There are some specific things that we need to learn about it.
Yeah, so good to be up here again.
So when talk about transition, first of all,
it's a total misnomer because there's no such thing.
You cannot actually transition from one sex to another.
It's no gender transition.
That's a misnomer.
But because this is the term that we have, that we're going to use.
And we'll kind of talk about, you know, transition and say, okay,
we're going to socially transition.
We might start with that.
That's names, it's pronouns, it's maybe hair, clothes,
things like that.
And we talk about medical or chemical transition
and that might be like puberty blockers
or maybe cross-sex hormones, things like in other matters to try
to encourage a presentation of the opposite sex, right?
And then we talk about surgical transition
and that would be anything from putting in mastectomies
or putting in breast implants in men or boys
or doing what they call top surgery.
And then there's bottom surgery
which might mean castration or chiectomy.
It might mean turning a penis into a vagina
And, you know, otherwise, you know, there's all kinds of things
or you can do things like shaving jaws and Adam's apples
and hips and all kinds of things.
So when we talk about this,
that's kind of what we're talking about.
It's usually a progression.
Sometimes it happens faster or slower.
And then we talk about, then I'm going to throw in a term too,
just so you, and we're going to come back to that later,
is the term detransition, which is even worse.
It's not even in our lexicon.
It's not even considered a thing.
If you ask any, you know, buddy in that transgender ideology,
they're like, no, there's no such thing as a de-transition.
You're just re-transitioning.
Seriously, it's like, oh,
you're just continuing your gender journey.
And you're not actually, like, going back to identifying
as you're, you know, having a phenotype
that matches your actual sex.
So, just to have some overall definitions for you
when we talk about this.
Thank you.
So, Kim, I read about a case in Kaiser Permanente
was a healthy transition of child.
Can a young child get informed consent?
No.
No, no, no.
So, okay, my perspective, both panels,
informed consent, what I'm seeing in children,
and that's what I can speak to,
informed consent for just surgery in general.
I see a lot of surgeries.
I've had surgeries.
I've had complications from every single surgery I've had.
So that's one.
Going back to the last panel, when you try to say anything is 100% safe or 100% effective,
that is just a lie.
Every drug I use has side effects, so I have to understand, okay, what are the side effects?
So every surgery has side effects.
So I recommend a book on this subject.
Maryam Grossman.
She's a child psychiatrist lost in trans-nation that I read this book this week and it really
opened my eyes to the evil that is out there.
And because I wanted to understand, okay, how do you get informed consent for this?
Well, we can go back to definitionally, you have to understand risks and benefits, short
long-term, has to be voluntary, has to be non-coerced.
So children, no, don't have the mental cognition.
We've always protected children, right?
We've always, they have to be, you know, their parents give consent
for them until they're over 18.
How we are coercing parents currently is with this lie.
If we don't let them transition, they'll kill themselves.
That's the, right, that's the gun to the head of the parents.
So no, the children can't understand.
So you went through the continuum.
So I researched, okay, what's the side effect at every step?
So the continuum is social transitioning.
Then there's puberty blockers.
Then there's the cross-sex hormones.
Then there's surgery.
Turns out there's side effects at every step.
So this adolescent onset gender dysphoria is a new phenomenon.
So there's certain things in mental health.
I'm learning from the psychiatrist.
I'm quoting the psychiatrist.
I apologize if I'm getting this wrong.
But there's certain things, kind of stable incidence, right?
Schizophrenia, stable incidence.
Pre-pubertal gender dysphoria tends
to have had a pretty much stable incidence.
You might, and then there's like adult onset.
We know like the first gender phenomenon.
Okay, so maybe there's a stable incidence of this.
This adolescent onset gender dysphoria
that we're seeing is truly social media and peer group influenced.
From the data and studies that we have from the old phenomena
that we're aware of, most, if there's prepubertal gender dysphoria,
most of it is resolved in puberty because they start
to get the hormones that help them resolve.
It's like 70 to 90% resolution
by just letting them go through puberty.
So the evil of doing puberty lockers,
so every step in the continuum increases the likelihood
that they'll go on to the next step continuum.
So if you, okay, social transitioning,
that seems like we're gonna,
different names, different pronouns, different clothes,
and then I'm gonna talk about the other things
that they do that have side effects.
If you start social transitioning before puberty,
it's like 98%, but do not resolve their gender dysphoria.
So we are putting them on a pathway that is,
and once one, they go from one step,
they go to the next step,
then they go to the next step,
and they go to the next step.
So let's talk about what they're doing.
There's things conceptually in their brain,
you're teaching them unreality, right?
That's hard on their brain.
You change their name in it,
you change their pronouns in immature brains.
That's problematic.
Breast binders, it actually changes the skin elasticity
and makes with breast sag.
So they get to a point,
well, I don't want these breasts anymore, right?
Increases the likelihood that they'll go on to mastectomy.
This is a horrific one.
The boys, sorry, I'm going to say horrifying things,
but they put their testicles in their inguinal canals
And then they bind so that that puts them at risk of pain
and infection, but testicular torsion.
That's a surgical emergency.
Sorry. So that's just the social transitioning,
which a lot of parents think, well, this is a benign first step,
not a benign first step.
The other thing that they're failing
to do is old psychiatric practice.
They had to be evaluated for mental health issues
and history of trauma.
Not doing that anymore, right?
We just, the child says they want to be a different gender.
We have to, what do we call it?
I don't even know what the term, affirming.
We have to affirm that.
The school has to affirm that.
The parents have to affirm that.
If you don't affirm that, that's evil.
So we're separating parents from children.
So damaging just at step one.
Step two, pubertal walkers, women my age,
put a child in menopause, right?
There's so many things, they can have osteoporosis.
So then the eggs and the sperm never develop
so that you're consigning them to infertility.
Then they move on to cross sex hormones,
which I didn't know increases their risk
of metabolic syndromes.
So, incredible side effects from the cross-sex hormones, and this is interesting to me in
our culture that is hyper sexually aware.
We're actually destroying their ability to have satisfying and sexual encounters.
And then, when you get to the surgeries, over 75 percent of the surgeries have complications.
And what we're doing is making these children lifetime patients.
So that was a long answer.
But it's horrific.
So James, how did we get here?
How did we get here?
First, before I address how we got here, I'm going to give you a little history on gender.
We can't talk about transgender without talking about gender.
Before I do that, I just want to make a few kind of very simple points.
First of all, up here on the stage, one of us is not like the other.
Can anyone tell?
You might even notice that we're not sitting the same way
and that there might be reasons for that.
And you think I'm being lewd or gross maybe, but no,
it's that our hips are different sizes and shapes.
Our pelvises, I should say, are different sizes.
So there are these things.
So Catherine brought up the extremely important point
of language and the fact that the word transition is a misnomer.
Transition as its root, trans.
Trans means to go from A to B, from one place to another.
But when we undergo something like transgender,
you go from A to still A. You didn't get anywhere.
The boy is still a boy no matter what drugs
or surgeries the boy has had.
This is the kind of simple blunt fact that if we want
to stop this menace, we have to be able to just say,
the girl will never become a boy and she's fine the way she is.
She doesn't need to try.
And the surgery, the puberty blockers,
puberty blockers are horrifying by the way.
But I want to just add one word to what you said, Kim.
When we say cross-sex hormones, since there's a lot of physicians
in the room, you need to realize this is super physiological doses
of cross-sex hormones.
This is how you take a situation where the testes
or the ova are not developing, and then you fry them
with the opposite sex hormones in extraordinarily large doses
to try to force a body to do something
that it doesn't do and will not do.
And this is the blunt reality of this horrifying thing
that has this cute name, gender-affirming care,
which if it was actually affirming their gender,
you'd be giving them same sex hormones.
Isn't that ridiculous?
All this is so upside down.
So how did we get here?
That's the question.
We, all the feminists will cheer and then not be so happy
as we go through this progression.
We got here largely, I'm not going to go back
and blame the feminist first, although we should.
We got here, I'll come back to it.
We got here because of a man named John Money.
John Money was working with special cases
of what are called now disorders of sexual development or DSD.
They were previously called intersex.
They were previously before that called hermaphroditism.
In other words, you had these babies who were born with anomalies
that were sex ambiguous or something to that effect.
You can imagine there's a variety of these
or chromosomal disorders or other disorders.
There are things that are, you know,
the genitalia don't form the way that we expect them to and so on.
And he's working with these cases, and he's trying
to essentially figure out why sex is differentiated.
He wrote this book called Men and Women, Boys and Girls,
and then he went on to write another book
that was much more horrifying after that.
And so he picks up this idea off
of two other psychiatrists named Stoller and Greenson.
And Stoller and Greenson had coined the term gender identity,
which is probably one of the most fateful mistakes
that was made in this kind of field.
Because if you actually read Stoller and Greenson,
they were not ideologues.
They were very clearly describing what should have been
called sex identity.
Very clearly describing your sense of being male or female.
And that's actually their definition.
There's two of them there, by the way,
male and female, the usual ones.
There's no non-binario, non-binaria in Spanish.
If that's a look up non-binary in a translator to Spanish,
it gives you two, one masculine and one feminine.
It's true.
He was, the Stolen Greensome were saying that you,
we do have a psychological and social sense of being male or female
and that's consequential in behavioral ways.
And John Money picks this up and says, well I have all these disorders
of sexual development, we call them now these hermaphrodites
that I'm working with and it can't be tied
to their essential physical sex.
So what do we do?
We'll use this concept of gender identity and gender role
and separate it from the underlying physiology.
So what we actually have, what does the word gender mean,
is it means sex without sex.
That's it.
This is a nonsense term.
And it takes on a purely, purely ideological definition,
which has to do with clothing
and that's why they're wearing, it's a social transition.
Wear different clothes, maybe wear makeup,
act a different way, hang out with different friends.
This is a purely phenomenological thing that's happening
on the underlying essence of who we are.
And John Money's idea was actually the underlying essence
doesn't matter, which put him in strong agreement as it turns
out with feminists who would otherwise hate him.
So we go back a little further before that in 1949,
I think this is really the key year.
We have a very important feminist woman, the kind of foremother
of second wave feminism, as it usually gets called,
is Simone de Beauvoir, French feminist.
And she writes this book called The Second Sex.
You get the point.
She's complaining that women are relegated
to less important than men.
And so she asks the quintessential question
in this book that Marsha Blackburn stuck
to Contangi Brown Jackson with great humor
and Matt Walsh made a movie about what is a woman.
That's 1949.
What is a woman?
that we are not born women, but we become them.
One is not born, but becomes woman,
is the statement literally translated from the French.
And so her idea was that patriarchal society forces women
to be a certain way, and that she either takes that up
and becomes a woman according to what society says,
so it's a social phenomenon, or she rebels against it,
in which case she's still setting her course off
of the patriarchal order.
And there's no woman in herself that's defining herself
on her own terms.
In other words, what she was looking at was sex roles.
These sex roles get conflated into this gender identity a couple
of decades later.
And down the track we have another, one of the fairy godmothers
as I call them of queer theory, Gail Rubin,
who was a sex positive radical feminist,
whether the radical feminist liked that or not, who's writing
and saying she's taken up everything Simone de Beauvoir said.
She'd take up everything that John Money had
in his conception of gender identity.
And it was just what was in the water and all
of her feminist circles.
She actually says it was in the earth, the air, the water,
and all of the feminist pamphlets we so eagerly consumed.
So this is just how they were thinking.
Because feminists were desperate to deconstruct gender and sex roles
and decouple them from the biological essential nature underneath.
And now you have this genius girl, Reuben, who comes along and says,
let's mix that with Marx, let's mix that with Freud
and create a whole new ideology, a whole new,
she called radical politics of sex in the 1970s and 1980s.
And this is this free-floating phenomenological idea
of gender.
So I know this is getting a little bit long,
but it's weeny and I want you to understand sex is biology.
It is reality.
It is essential.
Usia in the Greek is a matter of essence.
Gender is a phenomenon.
It is, in philosophical terms, it is geared in terms of phenomenology.
What the transgender phenomenon is,
is saying that the phenomenology precedes the essential reality.
In other words, phenomena precedes reality.
It's putting the, it's putting reality's true organization exactly
backwards, and that's why everything has to be upside down.
We got here because the people who took
up this ideology following people like Gayle Rubin felt very strongly
like because of their presentation and their physical bodies,
because of their politics, because of their sexuality,
which was often not just that they were lesbians,
but frequently that they were frankly perverts, and they didn't feel
like they fit in, that they were going to do everything they could
to make society accommodate them.
And so this is also the essence.
I don't like the word transsexual either, but there's a difference
between transsexual and transgender.
And this is very key.
A transsexual is somebody who's undergoing these same sorts
of procedures, usually adult onset as an adult,
your Bruce Jenner might be a case of this,
who goes through these processes and tries to pass, as they call it,
tries to actually look like the sex they're behaving as,
and is often frequently not always,
not that Jenner's a great case here,
but is frequently very modest about it.
Wants to blend in, doesn't want it to be a big deal
because it's an individual decision.
So we have this sense in these free countries of individual rights
of adults who aren't harming anybody else, let them be,
let them do what they want as long as they're consenting adults,
working with their doctors or whatever it is.
But then you have transgender.
Transgender is a social phenomenological object in its entirety
because the concept of gender is in its entirety such a thing.
And it only works, never works,
it only works when everybody believes it works.
So there is an automatic compulsion of belief and thought
and speech connected to the transgender phenomenon.
It is not enough that the child that we're talking about goes
through the processes of social transition
and then whatever else in the medical transitions.
It is that everyone must affirm it or it doesn't work.
The magic's not there.
The way you get from A to B in transgender alchemy,
that's the right word for it and they use this word for it themselves,
is that you force everyone to play along with you.
And that's why there's this huge amount of compulsion
and tyranny involved in it.
And so why are we here?
It's because the people who pioneered queer theory,
who were sex positive radical feminists in the 70s and 80s,
picking up John Money's gender idea,
picking up postmodern deconstruction to tear apart any sense
of gender roles and sex roles, these people were weirdos.
And they wanted to force society to accept them as weirdos
without trying to conform to norms or standards at all.
They were pathological people who wanted
to make their pathology accepted by everyone.
And if you can force somebody to transition their kid,
that person's in for life.
And they will tell everybody that they know that you need
to be in for life or you hate my child.
And you have all of the emotional extortion rackets.
Now one last thing I'll point out is this is a social phenomenon.
This is largely social media.
to talk to anybody who's gone through transition
and has since desisted or de-transitioned,
they'll tell you, I got radicalized on social media.
The schools are feeding it rather than trying to stop it.
But this goes well beyond a social contagion.
Social contagion, we saw that with bulimia.
We've seen it with other things.
We see it with the kids watching TikTok
and pretending that they have Tourette's, which is real.
They develop ticks.
They don't think they're developing this.
But the social contagion is real.
This is a driven phenomenon.
WPATH in partnership with the International Planned Parenthood Federation in conjunction
with the United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization, UNESCO, is pushing
this through the comprehensive sexuality education programming into every school in every country
they have dominion over.
Kenya, European countries, everywhere this is happening, and it is being driven for children
to be given this sex confusion at young ages.
And I believe it is actually much more malicious
than the medical aspects and the profit people make.
I believe it is there, as you said, you have children going
through the process of category formation in their brains.
They're young, boy, girl, adult, child.
They have very basic categories and some, you know,
ask a three-year-old any question of this sort, I'm a boy.
They freak out.
They're very, very categorical, and now you introduce to them, maybe you're not.
And it's not just that they're not developing right.
What you're training them is exactly what Ken Tanji Brown Jackson said.
I don't know if I'm a woman.
I have to ask.
She said a biologist, which is a transphobia, but they let her pass because it's not about
the issue.
It's about political power.
What she meant was you have to ask an expert.
So what you're telling a child is even on the most basic questions of existence, you
have to ask one of us.
You are training them to be utterly dependent
for the most basic information in the universe
on the anointed experts, the gender theorists,
their psychologists, their teachers,
whoever it happens to be.
And that's why I think that this is a disastrously dangerous
ideological move and political move in addition
to the medical catastrophe that has to accompany it
so we can go through the motions of forcing everybody
to pretend to believe it.
Thank you.
I also say this from a social point of view coming from communism,
from totalitarianism, and I think what people don't realize this is meant
to confuse our children so our children becomes units
and these units are very much easy to control.
Government is in charge of your child.
And I fear that this has been introduced specifically in this era
of confusion and COVID policies, again, for the,
to confuse the young minds that are growing
so they don't have individual thoughts.
So I know, Katherine, you have much more to say about this as well.
Yeah, I just want to follow up on what they said,
and there's really not a shred of legitimate evidence
about gender dysphoria and that going
through these procedures solves their problems.
The DSM-5 or 37 or whatever number we're on right now,
you know, the definition for gender dysphoria,
they've medicalized this, is just based on stereotypes.
You know, girls like pink and dolls and boys like, you know,
blue and trucks and, I mean, if you look at it, it's just going,
it's regressive stereotypes about what makes people
like one way or another, and it's completely shredded.
James mentioned WPATH, it's the World Professional Association
of Transgender Health, and they have like standards of care.
They named it to make it seem so official and so legitimate,
but I mean it's, they named it that way, but there's, I mean,
there's like a whole, I don't know how many page document
that was blown open I think last year, and it just said,
It just, it's so corrupt and there's no shred of evidence.
There's the Dutch Protocol that was also like really false
and very illegitimate, poorly designed study that's really designed
to prove their, the outcome that they want.
And in fact, there was another study that was done, but, you know,
the New York Times, you know, wanted to, you know, publish it,
but then the person who was doing the study said,
No, we can't publish this because it actually proves the opposite
of what we want to accomplish.
I can put up, I have slides and slides and slides.
There's the Society for Ethical Gender Medicine, scgm.org,
and you can find pages and pages and pages of real,
of legitimate medical literature that goes
into the case against transition.
And there's the myth of suicide.
There's the myth of, you know, it's just basically the myth
that you can transition at all.
But just to say that, like, there is, there's no such thing.
And there's so much mental health.
There's 25% of kids who are in transition are
on the autism spectrum disorder.
They see things very black and white.
They're very suggestible.
There's a lot of mental health and a lot of issues about puberty
and growing, and because we've commodified the bodies
of everyone, and like, oh, a girl's like, I don't,
I don't feel like a girl because I'm not Kardashian-like,
or I don't feel like, you know, I'm like this,
or I'm not manly, and there's a toxic war on masculinity,
and so they're like, well, I don't feel like this
because of the social contagion, and so they'll capitalize on,
like, you know, raise your hand if you really liked,
you know, enjoy going through puberty, right?
You know, it's not good for anyone, but you've got this,
you know, this social, you know, construct
that James was saying is like, yeah, you don't have
to go through that.
You can pause it.
It's not true.
There's no such thing.
I mean, just the puberty blockers effect
on your own mental health, it basically pauses everything.
I mean, you know, you can listen, you know,
I just listened to a podcast about a guy
who had hypogonadotropic hypogonadism, and you don't go
through regular puberty, and then you just struggle
for the rest of your life in your development.
Not just physical, but mental development.
And then there's this whole thing about disorders
of sexual development, DSDs.
I'm just laying out like a lot of different threads
or which we can go through, but we don't have time for that.
But just to say, it is very complicated when you talk
about little kids, adolescent, and then transitioning
as adults, it's very, it's very complicated.
But it's not complicated to say that we should,
there's just no such thing as transitioning minors
and it should not be done.
I also forgot to say at the beginning
that I really appreciate the IMA for hosting a whole panel
on this and bringing it out in the open.
So thank you.
Because we have to say, you know,
we have to say the quiet part out loud.
We have to speak truth.
And we have to say that this is not a thing.
And I really appreciate, you know, we're speaking
out on everything else.
And this is absolutely one
of the things that's plaguing the youth.
A couple other trends, the Lost in Transnation.
Another resource would be Abigail Shrier's book is
Irreversible Damage, and she describes the whole phenomenon
of rapid onset gendered euphoria, which was coined
by Lisa Littman in, I don't know,
the 20 teens or something like that.
Anyway, lots and lots of, I'm just spewing information out,
but I want to leave room for time for questions, too.
The one last thing I did mention when I come back
to the concept of detransitioner, is this slide going
to be put up on the panel, the one I'm looking at?
How about at the end?
Huh?
Okay.
And so, not to divert from our topic of transitioning minors, but I mentioned that detransition
is not part of the lexicon.
On Detrans Awareness Day on March 12th, last month we launched the Resilience Health Network
on one of the core clinicians, and this is a group of doctors and other allied health
professionals who are helping detransitioners with their medical needs as they seek to reclaim
a phenotype of their original natal sex.
And so we are recruiting physicians.
You can be an active participant.
You can be a consultant.
There's a slide with the QR code that goes to the website.
If you're interested in helping or learning more about it, just see me after.
Or go to the QR code or email that email address.
So I want to leave the rest of the time for any more comments or questions.
But thank you.
Thank you.
So Kim, where do we go from here?
How do we heal?
How do we heal?
I don't know.
Dr. Gerstmann talks about nuclear options in her book.
And I mean, we have to employ some nuclear options.
So we've talked a lot about parenting.
You said it, kids don't need phones.
The phones are contributing in so many ways to their poor mental health.
It makes this more likely for them.
Another thing we're passionate about is we work with sexually trafficked individuals.
That's the number one way that people are sexually trafficked is through social media.
So just knowing the risks that are out there for your children and knowing that the schools
and the government, even though you have the right,
you said you can look it up and you can look up the law
and parents need to be empowered by the law and be willing
to find probably legal counsel to defend them,
but the forces are trying to get you separated from your child.
So just recognizing that those forces are out there
that are trying to separate children from their parents,
that's what struck me as I read all about this is these are these
ideologues that are influencing and causing this problem
at which they don't have to live through the consequences.
It's the families that are living through the consequences
of this destruction that they're causing.
James, before we go to questions, what are your kind
of final thoughts on what's happening to our society?
I think that this is the most obvious and alarming aspect of all
of the different bids for totalitarian control
of our society that's happening.
It's horrifying people, but people also,
well it's the most obvious, it's also the least easy
to understand how it fits in.
So I gave my long remarks and I mentioned people like Gail Rubin
and Kat replied by, you know, in communist countries,
there's this attempt to confuse the children
to make them suggestible and so on and controllable.
Well, queer theory can be very, very easily shown
to directly derive from Marxism.
If you think of economic capital as a form of capital,
that you can have the haves and the have-nots and put them
in conflict with one another.
You can think of being considered normal as a kind
of cultural capital, social capital, and there are the people
who are considered normal, who appointed themselves normal,
and everybody else who has to go to war with that.
And the definition of queer in queer theory is, in fact,
that which is oppositional or defiant against the normal,
the legitimate, and the dominant.
It's a political stance.
There is no queer child.
So we have to look at this honestly
as a ideological phenomenon and a political maneuver
that is happening under the guise of medicine.
The primary victims of this are the children who are being turned
into pawns of it, but also more broadly
because of these ugly concatenations of letters
that we all are used to, alphabet soup, LGBTQ.
You have gays and lesbians who are now wrapped into this T
and Q phenomenon that doesn't represent them
and in fact represents the opposites of their interests
but uses them as human shields.
So we're going to see destruction there as well
as a result of this forced association with a monstrosity.
But my final thoughts agree with everybody else on the panel.
This isn't a real thing.
We should stop pretending it's a real thing.
We must not talk about it as though it is a real thing.
We must be completely unafraid to say that boys are boys
and girls are girls, and that's the end of the story.
There is no other.
There's no more than that.
And that every child is beautiful the way that they are,
and we want to help them with whatever psychiatric
or physical or any other health problems or issues that they have to the best of our ability
with actual genuine compassion, and genuine compassion starts with acknowledging reality
to help them best accord to the world that they actually live in and who they are in.
I'll just, one last thought on that is if we do not have the courage to use blunt, plain
in language to speak honestly, we will not stop this.
Thank you, James.
So a question for you, James.
How do we best identify the rare individual
with true gender dysphoria in the setting of the social contagion
that is likely fueling this phenomenon?
So that builds off of what I just said, okay?
So there are children and adults who genuinely experience a dysphoric
sensation about who they are.
I don't like the word gender dysphoria because of the DSM-5,
which describes it as the feeling of discomfort
with all of these stereotypes and whatever.
So the treatment is just to treat the discomfort,
which is why you get gender-affirming care,
to treat the discomfort instead of treating the underlying issue.
I think that there actually are this baseline
that you were mentioning.
I think that there are actually baseline,
there's some proportion of kids.
And these kids are the ultimate largest victims because now they're
in a sea of teenage girls who want to be cool in middle school,
who have to pretend that, you know,
that their name is Trevor now.
And they get lost.
The only way, actually, I think in my opinion is very interesting
because I think it takes an immense amount of direct one
on one care with a qualified care provider,
not some WPATH certified lunatic.
It requires genuine interaction over a long period of time
to identify that this is what's happening and to figure
out a course of action to deal with.
It's certainly not attending a gender clinic for 15 minutes
and being told this is your course for life now.
This is absolutely unacceptable.
This is a very slow process.
And I think it's ironic that it's a very slow process
because in many of the cases it would actually exclude them
from being able to undergo gender transition as a minor
if you spent a long time trying to figure
out what their issues are. I think watch and wait is the best way to approach this. Be
as compassionate as you can with what you're presented with if you are trying to provide
especially psychiatric care. Defer to the differential diagnoses. Is there autism? Is
there underlying trauma? Is there borderline personality? Are there tendencies to self
harm? Is there anxiety? There are a lot of things that defer to the underlying possible
differential diagnoses. And as Kim said, the cure for most kids to gender dysphoria is
puberty and so help them get to that point help them say you might feel this
way now but in a few years your body's gonna go through a lot of uncomfortable
changes and this is very likely to resolve so don't stress out about it
and then be as compassionate and honest as you can don't buy into the lie though
so we can identify that child by spending time with them and then let
puberty do what it does if it doesn't resolve after puberty now you're in a
different domain, and you can start to try to evaluate it otherwise.
I still don't think that anybody under the age, the issue of informed consent, anybody
under the age of 18, really probably older than that, from what I understand, silicone
breast implants, you have to be 22 to get those, so we'd sometimes have older limits
in 18.
I don't think that they are cognitively capable of understanding what they're sacrificing,
and their parents certainly can't decide for them what they're sacrificing, so that there's
no ethical way to proceed with a transition social or especially medical in a child whatsoever.
So even in the teenage years we're still going to have to watch and wait and take great care
and work very closely with carefully trained professionals, again, who didn't go through
a WPATH training.
We've got to get the ideological lunatics out of the academies and out of our associations.
Sorry, no then.
So there's some lies that are told, right, this all started because of the concept of
ambiguous genitalia, it's less than .02% of births, number one.
And then two, when we put children down this path, they actually have normal genitalia
that we make abnormal.
The whole path, even if it's just the cross sex hormones, makes them have abnormal genitalia,
which then, right, increases, yeah, depression and the likelihood that they will continue
down the pathway.
And then this lie about suicide.
We do have information in the adult dysphoric community that they're consenting adults and
they consent to this surgical path.
And the suicide rate in those patients is high.
So we're not, it's kind of, there's some parallels to COVID here.
This is novel.
We don't have evidence.
We don't have evidence.
We don't have long term research that these interventions are doing anything.
So these ideologues come in with this is urgent.
We need to do something about it.
If you're a compassionate human being, you'll do something about it.
So there's some real lies out there to uncover in this whole ideology.
Well, that's the, that's, I mean, that's the whole point.
I mean, that, you know, in this whole takeover, totalitarianism, totalitarianism, I learned
this term from James about medical lysincoism, you can ask him to explain that later.
We don't have time.
But basically, it does not matter what the science says.
The ideology says we pursue this path, and that's all this confusion.
And it doesn't matter that the science is poor and nonexistent.
This is where we're going and we're going to pursue this in spite of, like, in spite
of ivermectin working, right, you know, like the parallel to everything.
In spite of what we know about everything else, this is the ideology that we must follow
in order to pursue this particular agenda.
And it's impossible for a teenager to consult about lifelong infertility when they're going,
you know, you're 13 and, you know, you don't want your period to come anyway, but so what,
so what, so what, right?
So, the next question, do you guys see an epidemic of transition regret in the future
given that much literature downplays it and regret may take years to manifest?
Yeah, 100%.
I mean, this is why we started this Resilience Health Network is the detransreddit group
was what, tens of thousands of people on there and I mean it's anywhere from the social to
to chemical, to surgical transition, you know,
the de-transition, yes.
I mean, we could say a lot more about this, but 100%.
So do look out for it, and don't be afraid to ask about it.
You know, your practices, your families,
or something like that, I mean, offer hope.
I mean, you can't believe, like, the amount of shame and the guilt,
what they put their families through, or what the families,
you know, put their kids through, and to overcome.
I mean, you know, I've met some of these very outspoken detransitioners
and I mean, their stories are incredible just to be out and talking
about what they went through and what was done to them, even if it was,
you know, as a teenager.
The shame, but it's huge, tens of thousands of kids
and it's only going to get more.
And so just be gentle and listen, but yeah, the wave is coming.
And lawsuits.
Lawsuits.
Yeah.
On the point of lawsuits, by the way, there's this fraud
and it's kind of been touched upon,
but we haven't explicitly pointed it out.
It's been going on.
When you see these studies that come out
and they always reference their little in-house cooked book
studies, the poor studies Catherine was mentioning,
when you look at their studies, they'll say, well,
here's a study that shows that when we do the interventions
that their, you know, psychological outcomes improve.
They're happier, blah, blah, blah, trans joy, they call it.
I'm not joking.
And what they do is they,
when you said there's a parallel to COVID,
they do really shoddy studies that are designed
to get only the results that they want.
It's like the vitamin D studies.
They will only look at people in the six months
after their surgery, for example,
when they're still in their honeymoon phase.
You have a psychiatric disturbed young person
who feels no hope, undergoes this surgery, thinks there's hope now,
doesn't realize, hasn't hit the brick wall yet,
and that's who they survey, and it makes their outcomes better.
The average time of desistance comes much later.
It's actually about seven years, seven years.
The average statute of limitations for these lawsuits,
for malpractice lawsuits, is two years.
And you can see the massive mismatch here.
So some states like Missouri have actually done this
and extended the statute of limitations.
I think another state or two have done it too.
beyond that average time of decisions.
In fact, I think the 20 years are with no limitation.
And miraculously, all the healthcare providers
in those states have stopped performing the procedures.
It's very interesting.
So when you ask, do you see a wave of transition regret
in the future, besides the obvious yes,
there's the proof in the pudding.
All you have to do is give the injured parties a right to action
that extends beyond the average time of desistance,
and all of a sudden nobody's willing to take the risk
to do these procedures in the first place,
because everybody knows that there's going
to be this tidal wave of regret.
Well, our time is up, so thank you all for this panel.
I think we all learned a lot today.
Thank you very much.
Thank you.
