SJWs and Same Sex Marriage movement
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
31-08-2017, 12:27 PM
RE: SJWs and Same Sex Marriage movement
(30-08-2017 10:29 PM)Aractus Wrote:  The AIDS never reached epidemic here in Australia because of the response by the public health professionals here. They did that by convincing the decision makers of the day that AIDS was a threat to straight people and not just gays. Now I agree that's indicative of a systemic prejudice that existed at the time, but we should recognise that we have moved on from then and the prejudice is now less then what it used to be.

I'm not exactly sure what you're point here is. It's great that AU never had an epidemic like they did here. But that's beyond my point that trans people have been a part of the SGM (or LGBTQ) movements from the beginning.

(30-08-2017 10:29 PM)Aractus Wrote:  But it's not the norm, not even for trans people. As you just went on to acknowledge it isn't the norm for people to de-transition. And I suspect that's because a number of them weren't really trans but had a different mental health condition. Hence why you need to see a doctor to diagnose the condition in the first place, as without that you can have people who think they are trans but may not be. That's the reality.

The theory put forward by SJWs says that people can decide on their own gender identity, and that's really not the correct medical view.

One doesn't "decide" their own gender identity, my friend. One can identify their identity, and decide how to address that, but they don't decide their identity. The language matters, here, because there's a distinction between a misdiagnosis from a doctor (and historically they have most-often misdiagnosed that trans people were NOT trans rather than cis people as trans) and someone just "deciding" that they are trans.

Trans people ARE the ones that can identify if they are trans. Who else do you think can tell a doctor about it? Again, the problem historically has been one of doctors standing in the way of trans people being able to medically transition (aka gate-keeping)- not misdiagnosing cis people as trans. That's a relatively new issue. And it's going to happen sometimes.

There are also informed consent clinics that trans people can go to if they want to start on hormones without making a doctor diagnose them. They are informed about the risks and make the decision to begin medical transition on their own. The doctor will then provide them with a prescription for hormones without a diagnosis and blood hormone testing.

People can and do also buy hormones online- without a prescription and without a diagnosis. Because they know that they are trans, and maybe don't have the resources or ability to see a doctor (geographic unavailability, no insurance, not enough money for a doctor, parents forbidding transition, etc.).

The amount of trans regret that exists is statistically very small. And these resources help trans people be able to overcome obstacles that are often put in their way due to the societal problems we have- like stigmatization. They aren't all "safe" (like self-medication using internet hormones), unfortunately, but desperation drives people to take those risks.

It's best to transition under a knowledgeable doctor's care. But that's not always an option, and desperate trans people will find a way to transition- because gender dysphoria can be lethal, otherwise. It can and does drive people to suicide.

Even with a doctor, though, cis people can sometimes be diagnosed as trans. Doctors get extremely little training on trans people. If they get it, it's because they've decided to pursue it on their own, because schools don't teach anyone about it. At least not in the US. So even those doctors that are willing to prescribe or diagnose, they often do so without a lot of knowledge. Sometimes the only thing they know is what a trans person tells them. It's not uncommon for trans patients to be teaching their doctor about trans treatment- because they've not been trained and we tend to do a TON of research into it before we even start to transition. I spent a couple years reading about it before I even knew I was going to transition.

I didn't NEED a doctor's diagnosis to know that I was trans. But if a doctor misdiagnosed me and said I wasn't trans- good god that would have thrown me into a depression spiral that probably would have been a crash and burn situation.

Doctors do misdiagnose- in both directions, but most often against trans people. They don't always know what's best- because they weren't always trained to know anything about trans people.

(30-08-2017 10:29 PM)Aractus Wrote:  When I say critics, there's a spectrum. Some are critical only about some things, others get far more critical to the point they feel they were mislead by doctors or others. So I don't mean to say that half become extreme critics.

That wasn't what I meant, I simply meant that a proportion probably about half (or more) of people that do de-transition become critics at one level or another of the current state of trans theory. I apologise if that wasn't clear.

I'm still having a hard time following you. And I think I'm still we need to see some statistics to back even that up- that half of detransitioners become critics.

In any case- being critical of the current state of trans theory is fine, so long as your criticism is rooted in sound facts and not just anecdotes. Actually, it's probably a necessity to further improve trans care. We've been moving in the right direction in general. A person who deists in transition might be critical that they were misdiagnosed or mislead by doctors or friends or something- and that really sucks for them. But, a slim few people that are misdiagnosed is a better than almost all trans people being denied care and booted to the street. Ideally, though, those who experienced poor medical care CAN keep providing their feedback and working in tandem with trans people to find the right way to medically diagnose and treat trans people.

It's not been that long since it's become more accepted to be trans and more doctors have opened their minds about treating trans people. There's absolutely still room for improvement.

(30-08-2017 10:29 PM)Aractus Wrote:  A far higher proportion of trans people go into sex work compared to the general population. It was what I was thinking of before when I thought of health issues of specific importance to the cohort. In some places prostitution is actively criminalised, and worse still in those places and in third world countries where it isn't there aren't health-protective measures in place (mandatory condom use for example). Fixing that is way more important to the well-being of people then same-sex marriage. I'm not saying that SSM isn't important, but compared to putting sex workers and their customers in avoidable health risks (that ultimately just end up placing a greater burden on the healthcare system if not prevented) it pales in comparison.

First- that's a false dichotomy. We can work to fix both situations, not just one or the other.

Second- yes, a very high proportion of trans people go into sex work. It's also important to try to address WHY that occurs. Primarily the reason why is because of stigma. Trans people lose their jobs at higher rates than cis people when they come out as trans. They lose their family and friends. They often don't have protection from landlord eviction on the basis of them being trans. A higher percent of the homeless are trans or another SGM than other groups, except, I think those with mental health issues. Trans people suffer depression at higher rates, too. Often gender dysphoria causes or leads to depression- as it did with me. All of these issues and more combine to force desperate people into sex work. And there is a money to be made in sex work.

Unfortunately, the stigma of ever having done sex work makes it even harder to go back into the professional workforce, too.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
01-09-2017, 05:02 PM
RE: SJWs and Same Sex Marriage movement
(31-08-2017 12:27 PM)Emma Wrote:  I'm not exactly sure what you're point here is. It's great that AU never had an epidemic like they did here. But that's beyond my point that trans people have been a part of the SGM (or LGBTQ) movements from the beginning.

Well the point I would make it that it was certainly a barrier to gays being given the appropriate public health response in many places, such as the United States which didn't do as Australia did and run a "grim reaper" education campaign. Had the AIDS epidemic happened this year, the public health response in the US would have been much stronger. Heck even the Australian response would have been stronger too.

Quote:One doesn't "decide" their own gender identity, my friend.

Great, we agree. Smile

Quote:Trans people ARE the ones that can identify if they are trans. Who else do you think can tell a doctor about it? Again, the problem historically has been one of doctors standing in the way of trans people being able to medically transition (aka gate-keeping)- not misdiagnosing cis people as trans. That's a relatively new issue. And it's going to happen sometimes.

Yes unfortunately psychiatry is still a young science.

Quote:There are also informed consent clinics that trans people can go to if they want to start on hormones without making a doctor diagnose them.

In Australia? Are they going to get the benefits of the PBS?

The US I assume you're talking about, wastes far more unnecessary phama products than Australia (generally people taking medications they don't need) - and even here the wastage is far higher than I think is acceptable. But the phama waste is one of the contributing reasons the US spends more per capita on healthcare than any other OECD nation.

Quote:The amount of trans regret that exists is statistically very small. And these resources help trans people be able to overcome obstacles that are often put in their way due to the societal problems we have- like stigmatization. They aren't all "safe" (like self-medication using internet hormones), unfortunately, but desperation drives people to take those risks.

It's best to transition under a knowledgeable doctor's care. But that's not always an option, and desperate trans people will find a way to transition- because gender dysphoria can be lethal, otherwise. It can and does drive people to suicide.

Right, those are all valid challenges.

Quote:Even with a doctor, though, cis people can sometimes be diagnosed as trans.

Well they need to see a specialist, and a psychiatrist at the very least and not a GP.

FYI doctors aren't health professionals. They treat sick people.

Quote:I spent a couple years reading about it before I even knew I was going to transition.

Again, this is a huge problem in health. And I don't mean you specifically, but generally speaking most people do not read PubMed, DSM-V, Government guidelines, WHO/AMA/other health organisations statements on health, and they generally don't understand the different levels of evidence as it applies in health. One of the things I plan to do soon is launch my own information website that links directly to clinical evidence and not internet ramblings and other such nonsense.

Quote:I didn't NEED a doctor's diagnosis to know that I was trans.

No of course not. But it's still important to be rigorous in matters of health. Self-diagnosing health conditions can be very problematic, especially in the area of mental health.

Quote:But if a doctor misdiagnosed me and said I wasn't trans- good god that would have thrown me into a depression spiral that probably would have been a crash and burn situation.

Yeah, so again there needs to be a better process in place for doctors to refer these matters to a specialist.

Quote:It's not been that long since it's become more accepted to be trans and more doctors have opened their minds about treating trans people. There's absolutely still room for improvement.

I can remember some US programme from the 90's that was denigrating trans guests, and that was before Springer. The level of stigma in that audience was incredible. But, that said I don't blame them for it. It takes time for social norms to change.

Quote:Second- yes, a very high proportion of trans people go into sex work. It's also important to try to address WHY that occurs. Primarily the reason why is because of stigma. Trans people lose their jobs at higher rates than cis people when they come out as trans. They lose their family and friends. They often don't have protection from landlord eviction on the basis of them being trans. A higher percent of the homeless are trans or another SGM than other groups, except, I think those with mental health issues. Trans people suffer depression at higher rates, too. Often gender dysphoria causes or leads to depression- as it did with me. All of these issues and more combine to force desperate people into sex work. And there is a money to be made in sex work.

Well the US is a poor example as it has so few anti-discrimination laws. You would not be able to fire an employee for being trans in Australia, and I suspect you wouldn't be able to evict a tenant either (further info here).

By the way the US ban on trans people serving in any capacity in the military was laughed at by just about every other Western democracy. We have no such ban in Australia, neither does Canada, NZ, UK, and most of Europe. That said, I'm not against certain jobs within the military being off-limits for certain groups of people, but I wouldn't be knowledgeable enough to comment on when that may and may not be appropriate.

Quote:Unfortunately, the stigma of ever having done sex work makes it even harder to go back into the professional workforce, too.

Yes that's another matter entirely. For the record I don't think anyone should go into prostitution. It's usually a way to enable substance addiction. And substance addition ends lives far too early. So does sex work actually, especially in countries where it isn't regulated at all and workers can be exposed to STIs and exploited by pimps.

My Blog
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
01-09-2017, 05:05 PM
RE: SJWs and Same Sex Marriage movement
(01-09-2017 05:02 PM)Aractus Wrote:  For the record I don't think anyone should go into prostitution.

For the record, who are you to tell people what they should or shouldn't do with their bodies?

Oh, I forget, this is someone who thinks "conservative" and "traditionalist" are good things to be Drinking Beverage

The enabling substance addiction is too idiotic even for you. And that's saying something.

"E se non passa la tristezza con altri occhi la guarderò."
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
01-09-2017, 06:09 PM
RE: SJWs and Same Sex Marriage movement
(30-08-2017 10:29 PM)Aractus Wrote:  A far higher proportion of trans people go into sex work compared to the general population.

That's fascinating, I'm assuming you've read something about this and can link me to the study. I'd love to read it.


But as if to knock me down, reality came around
And without so much as a mere touch, cut me into little pieces

Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Momsurroundedbyboys's post
01-09-2017, 06:36 PM
RE: SJWs and Same Sex Marriage movement
(01-09-2017 05:02 PM)Aractus Wrote:  For the record I don't think anyone should go into prostitution. It's usually a way to enable substance addiction.

Not gonna get involved in this particular conversation too deeply but, as a person who worked security for a time in a "brothel", this was absolutely not the case. Anecdotal I know but still my experience.

The vast majority of people who got involved in the industry when I was working was because....the pay is insanely better than almost every other available job, required no education (and thus no idiotic student loan debt), you could set your own hours, and despite what most people believe the majority actually enjoyed the work.

Most of the girls that had drug issues tied to sex work were because other people got them addicted to drugs to keep them manageable. It's a big problem in less well off countries and those where sex work is illegal, where "pimps" forcibly get girls addicted to drugs and act as their supplier, so long as they work they get supplied. That's not an issue of sex work that's an issue of slavery in my opinion, but it does happen. It's extremely rare in civilized countries where it's not illegal.

When valour preys on reason, it eats the sword it fights with.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 4 users Like WhiskeyDebates's post
01-09-2017, 06:42 PM
RE: SJWs and Same Sex Marriage movement
(01-09-2017 05:02 PM)Aractus Wrote:  For the record I don't think anyone should go into prostitution. It's usually a way to enable substance addiction.

This says more about your selection of whores than anything else.


that was a joke you fucks, backoff. Sex trafficking is a very serious international problem and should only be taken lightly by professionals who know what they're doing.

#sigh
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes GirlyMan's post
01-09-2017, 08:33 PM
RE: SJWs and Same Sex Marriage movement
(01-09-2017 06:09 PM)Momsurroundedbyboys Wrote:  That's fascinating, I'm assuming you've read something about this and can link me to the study. I'd love to read it.

It's in the academic literature, yes. Given the small population size of the cohort I'm not sure how far you can generalise about it. Most academic literature I've seen on sex work focuses on HIV intervention. In any case, for that specific citation see Herbst et al 2008 and Baral et al 2013.

My Blog
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
01-09-2017, 09:35 PM
RE: SJWs and Same Sex Marriage movement
(01-09-2017 06:36 PM)WhiskeyDebates Wrote:  Most of the girls that had drug issues tied to sex work were because other people got them addicted to drugs to keep them manageable.

Well that's consistent with what I said "enable".

Anyway, no it's not just a problem in the third world. It's a huge problem in Australia and other first-world countries and it's mentioned in dozens of academic articles (see Rekart 2005 for an albeit older but pretty decent overview of the health related matters and sex work). There is a strong relationship between drug use and prostitution. I've had 2 Canberran brothel owners tell me (at separate times) that all their girls are on ice. Anecdotal I know, and they could have been exaggerating, but it does reinforce what the studies tell us.

I can also tell you the opinion among health professionals is that preventing people entering prostitution and promoting/enabling their exit from the industry are viewed as the most effective intervention strategies for improving the health outcomes for sex workers. That's not to say it's the only strategy - of course not, and that's why other harm reduction strategies are extremely important. But it's why you'll find that in some countries the protection is solely on sex workers, but it's a crime for their customers to pay for sex (Sweden, Norway, Iceland, Northern Ireland, and France according to Wikipedia). I'd be interested to see the evidence for that intervention strategy sometime, I haven't bothered to look that up. Many of those places also ban organised brothels, and that could be a double-edged sword since brothels have (as you know) security and can enforce policies on their customers to protect their staff. I would think that stuff outweighs the negatives of brothels, but again I'd need to actually study the evidence to arrive at an informed opinion on that.

Also, even in civilised countries like Canada and Australia, prostitutes have been prevented from reporting rapes in recent history. And again, I guess this will be a feature of this thread, the neo-liberal policy of regulation itself has helped a lot in these regards. At least in most places, the USA operates under a neo-liberal view as well. As much as that may seem contradictory.

My Blog
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Aractus's post
05-09-2017, 09:25 AM
RE: SJWs and Same Sex Marriage movement
(01-09-2017 05:02 PM)Aractus Wrote:  
(31-08-2017 12:27 PM)Emma Wrote:  One doesn't "decide" their own gender identity, my friend.
Great, we agree. Smile

I get the feeling that you're not being entirely genuine when you say that. One's gender identity is less psychological than biological- or at least maybe equally so. It's still a matter of "more research is necessary", however, studies seem to show that the brains of trans people are have similarities to brains of cis people that align with the gender with which they identify.

In other words, a trans woman (male to female) may have areas of their brain that match more closely to a female brain than a male brain.

http://aebrain.blogspot.com.au/p/transse...ntity.html
https://www.scientificamerican.com/artic...der-brain/

And, as we know, people ARE their brain.

(01-09-2017 05:02 PM)Aractus Wrote:  Yes unfortunately psychiatry is still a young science.

I don't disagree, and that's kind of the point I've been making. You seem to be somewhat "freaking out" or at least overreacting over a strong minority of false-positive misdiagnoses which will be reduced as the science about trans people becomes more informed and medical practice evolves for the better. I think your brand of "advocacy" is premature and unnecessary.

(01-09-2017 05:02 PM)Aractus Wrote:  In Australia? Are they going to get the benefits of the PBS?

The US I assume you're talking about, wastes far more unnecessary phama products than Australia (generally people taking medications they don't need) - and even here the wastage is far higher than I think is acceptable. But the phama waste is one of the contributing reasons the US spends more per capita on healthcare than any other OECD nation.

Can you show me a positive link between informed consent clinics and the pharma waste of hormone therapy medication and over-prescribing of hormone therapy medication specifically? Otherwise your point is irrelevant to mine.

Also, to my knowledge, informed consent isn't really available for other types of treatment- just trans treatment. I could be wrong, but in any case it doesn't really matter. The total pharma waste and ultra-high spending from the US is NOT due to informed consent clinics for transgender patients, thank you very much. It's most likely not even a contributing factor, so your point about US spending is a non sequitur.

The US spending is due to much larger issues- such as over-prescribing of pain-killers and antibiotics, overpricing of medications, lack of affordable health care and insurance coverage, and other more far-reaching issues. Trans health care is not a significant factor in this equation.

(01-09-2017 05:02 PM)Aractus Wrote:  Well they need to see a specialist, and a psychiatrist at the very least and not a GP.

FYI doctors aren't health professionals. They treat sick people.

Please, review the WPATH guidelines for treatment of trans people. I think you'll find that nobody is disagreeing with you that specialist care is a necessity. Psychiatry care is not necessary, however.

I saw a psychiatrist when I was still questioning and the man was of appallingly little help. All he could tell me was that my anxiety and depression will lessen when I "decide" if I'm transgender or not. Angry I needed guidance and help figuring it out because I was too scared to risk losing my wife, even though I already knew the answer. I didn't need a psychiatrist, I needed a therapist that specialized in transgender issues.

(01-09-2017 05:02 PM)Aractus Wrote:  Again, this is a huge problem in health. And I don't mean you specifically, but generally speaking most people do not read PubMed, DSM-V, Government guidelines, WHO/AMA/other health organisations statements on health, and they generally don't understand the different levels of evidence as it applies in health. One of the things I plan to do soon is launch my own information website that links directly to clinical evidence and not internet ramblings and other such nonsense.

No, I read closely what other trans people researched on the subject from such sources. I also paid attention to WPATH. I knew about the medications available before I asked for them. I knew about the side-effects. I knew about the contraindications. I knew about dietary restrictions and potential issues. I knew about the DSM-V. I knew about potential challenges I'd encounter in the medical world. I was prepared.

This isn't shit that I could read about on WebMD. At least not at the time.

I know my experience is anecdotal, but there were a plethora of other trans people scouring for information in the same way I was- and sharing and comparing research papers. And that stuff is still happening. I used to belong to a trans group on Facebook where the entire purpose of the group was to provide research (with links to research papers) on trans issues. We're not just a bunch of prostitutes, after all. Not to mention that we've been working hard with the cisgender doctors and medical professionals who are allied with us in order to improve knowledge and care for trans people for decades.

We do this because the medical world has not had our back until very recently- and even now it's still in its infancy. We also do it because many of us are researchers by nature, or programmers by nature, or doctors, or scientists, and so on... and we have a vested interest in making sure the help we need is available. So, go ahead, and embark on your mission to fix medical research on the internet- but you will be miles behind trans people if you're going to focus on transgender care.

(01-09-2017 05:02 PM)Aractus Wrote:  No of course not. But it's still important to be rigorous in matters of health. Self-diagnosing health conditions can be very problematic, especially in the area of mental health.

Anxiety is a mental health issue. Depression is a mental health issue. Gender dysphoria is a mental health issue. But being transgender is not. Being transgender is a biological issue where medical treatment is necessary. However, because there is a link between the mental and physical nature of transgender issues, both a therapist and a medical doctor (usually an endocrinologist) are recommended for diagnosis and treatment when possible.

(01-09-2017 05:02 PM)Aractus Wrote:  Yeah, so again there needs to be a better process in place for doctors to refer these matters to a specialist.

Again, WPATH is already on it. You are not needed here. Let the professionals handle this, please.

(01-09-2017 05:02 PM)Aractus Wrote:  I can remember some US programme from the 90's that was denigrating trans guests, and that was before Springer. The level of stigma in that audience was incredible. But, that said I don't blame them for it. It takes time for social norms to change.

Yeah... you're tellin' me. I can remember that shit, too, like it was yesterday.

(01-09-2017 05:02 PM)Aractus Wrote:  Well the US is a poor example as it has so few anti-discrimination laws. You would not be able to fire an employee for being trans in Australia, and I suspect you wouldn't be able to evict a tenant either (further info here).

That's good that AU has those protections in place. I hope that they actually stand behind them. It's a step up from the US, but anti-discrimination laws don't really stop discrimination. It helps, but it doesn't eliminate it by any means. The stigma still exists, and it still results in trans people losing everything and having very few choices available to them.

(01-09-2017 05:02 PM)Aractus Wrote:  By the way the US ban on trans people serving in any capacity in the military was laughed at by just about every other Western democracy. We have no such ban in Australia, neither does Canada, NZ, UK, and most of Europe. That said, I'm not against certain jobs within the military being off-limits for certain groups of people, but I wouldn't be knowledgeable enough to comment on when that may and may not be appropriate.

There are 18 other nations that allow trans people to serve openly. The only reason Trump did this was to throw a bone to his base and get what he wants out of the hard right that wanted to prevent the US from covering medical care for trans people. We are just a pawn in his pathetic game.

Of course it's laughable. But transphobia is still acceptable to quite a lot of people and this is evidence of that. It would otherwise be a complete non-issue.

(01-09-2017 05:02 PM)Aractus Wrote:  Yes that's another matter entirely. For the record I don't think anyone should go into prostitution. It's usually a way to enable substance addiction. And substance addition ends lives far too early. So does sex work actually, especially in countries where it isn't regulated at all and workers can be exposed to STIs and exploited by pimps.

I'm not advocating that trans people should go into sex work. I mean, if they want to, by all means, go for it. But I'm saying that the issue is far more complicated than "trans people = sex work". And I don't know that it's "usually" a way to enable addiction. I think it often can be, but it also often doesn't start off that way. Look at the bigger issue- why are trans people suffering from higher drug-use rates that lead to addiction and then sex work? Let's target that as well as aiming to stop people from going into sex work. But making it illegal (not saying that's your goal) is a bad method for helping people recover from sex work and it doesn't really help to prevent it.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
11-09-2017, 12:04 AM
RE: SJWs and Same Sex Marriage movement
Back on topic, I have written to Andrew Barr regarding this. Unfortunately I may need to use my survey form to protest the ACT government funding one-side of the argument and not the other - when they shouldn't be funding it at all. It's a federal issue, they could have used the money to put advertising for Floriade or something else on the buses. I'll wait until I get a response before deciding what to do, but I'm extremely offended by this.

(05-09-2017 09:25 AM)Emma Wrote:  In other words, a trans woman (male to female) may have areas of their brain that match more closely to a female brain than a male brain.

Right, gender isn't "fluid".

Quote:The US spending is due to much larger issues- such as over-prescribing of pain-killers and antibiotics, overpricing of medications, lack of affordable health care and insurance coverage, and other more far-reaching issues. Trans health care is not a significant factor in this equation.

Any one single factor is not significant, but it's part of a larger system. You can't just decide to allow some people to decide on their own what government-subsidised pharmaceuticals they need. It has nothing to do with whether they're trans or not. One of the reasons I don't have private health cover, and will likely never get it, is because they subsidise pseudo-medicine like chiropractic - and if people want to decide that's the treatment they want then they shouldn't be getting any help with it. Evidence-based practise is what they should get offered, and if they don't want that they can go and pay whatever witch doctor they want on their own. Again, it's part of a larger problem, it's not at all specific to certain vulnerable health patients.

Quote:Please, review the WPATH guidelines for treatment of trans people.

I'll have a look at WPATH when I get a chance.

Quote:Anxiety is a mental health issue. Depression is a mental health issue. Gender dysphoria is a mental health issue. But being transgender is not. Being transgender is a biological issue where medical treatment is necessary. However, because there is a link between the mental and physical nature of transgender issues, both a therapist and a medical doctor (usually an endocrinologist) are recommended for diagnosis and treatment when possible.

Well health categorisations are rather crude. Transgender is not simply biomedical or psychological, and gender dysphoria is not a disorder per-se. I am thinking about "mental health" as per WHO's view that it is a component of health not necessarily tied to infirmity or disease. A negative (or positive) social environment can also be strongly tied to people's mental health well-being for example.

Quote:That's good that AU has those protections in place. I hope that they actually stand behind them. It's a step up from the US, but anti-discrimination laws don't really stop discrimination. It helps, but it doesn't eliminate it by any means. The stigma still exists, and it still results in trans people losing everything and having very few choices available to them.

Right, anti-discrimination legislation is there to protect people's rights, not to stop them from being personally vilified by random members of the community.

Quote:And I don't know that it's "usually" a way to enable addiction.

I suspect that would be different for trans sex-workers than it is for female cisgender prostitutes for who it is certainly true. But I don't think it would radically different, since male-to-female trans people have the same or similar mental cognitive processes as cisgender females.

Quote:Look at the bigger issue- why are trans people suffering from higher drug-use rates that lead to addiction and then sex work? Let's target that as well as aiming to stop people from going into sex work. But making it illegal (not saying that's your goal) is a bad method for helping people recover from sex work and it doesn't really help to prevent it.

No of course it's not the goal. Addressing drug use is very difficult - I think a good place to start is with community support behind it. Drug users are often violent dangerous criminals, and for that reason there's not a whole lot of sympathy for them.

The ACT Government tried to put a needle exchange vending machine into our gaol! Not surprisingly it had extremely little public support, and the guard's unions vetoed it. It is certainly true that people have contracted Hepatitis C countless times in gaols, and I think that's terrible. I knew a diabetic (now deceased) who was extremely offended that criminals would get the same single-use needles that she needs for her insulin for free while she and other diabetic patients had to purchase theirs. And that's a problem too with the needle-exchange "walk in centres" in the community. While I do agree with the policy, I also think it's wholly unfair to give drug users something for free that other healthcare patients have to purchase, and I think they need to at the very least make needles free for healthcare patients as well. Like I said, if you just run programs that people perceive as unfair, there won't be community support for them and they won't grow.

My Blog
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: