[nuggets]

What is your alternative explanation for why referrals have so sharply skewed towards girls who want to be boys, within the past decade or so?

It is doctors who first drew attention to this phenomenon. See for example Tavistock whistleblower David Bell.

[pryce]

Increasing social acceptibility and awareness is not mysterious to people who understand that many perceptions about gender are constructions that occur in social contexts.

Why do I owe you any specific "explanation" when the context here is that you are treating Shrier's pseudoscientific book that literally tells parents in the closing chapters that if their kid has a trans friend they should consider moving cities to get their child away from their trans friend as though we are supposed to take transphobic hate literature at face value.

Maybe a better step than me agreeing to do that is that instead you should take the entire corpus of medical literature on the subject, as well as the voices of trans people on the subject of trans people at face value first.

I have no interest in your JAQing off[1].

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Just_Asking_Questions

[nuggets]

You don't have to suggest an explanation for this demographic change if you don't want to.

[defrost]

The statistical evidence for a change in the paper you linked and the other papers in the area is extremely weak.

At one end of the scale is very little data that gives an unreliable picture with a high degree of variability, at the other end of the not very long in time scale is somewhat more data that provides a better picture.

To make such a fuss about " this demographic change " indicates a lack of exposure to such statistics.

Why are you attempting to make such a big deal of bad data here?

[alchemism]

The lady doth protest too much, methinks.

[nuggets]

It's interesting how much protest there is to even the suggestion there may be a social contagion aspect.

I think some people have backed themselves into an ideological corner on this one.

[defrost]

I suspect you're the one with an ideology.

I'm indifferent to the social issues here, I care about the <gasp> statistics presented.

With the linked and peer reports there's a short time span, limited populations, and a run of yearly statistics that start with very few numbers and end up with less than 2,000.

The initial numbers make the guesstimation of an inital demographic ratio extremely dodgy - it's not sound.

Despite this there's been someone with .. an idealogy(?) .. making numerous comments about "Look at the demographic shift, eh", "What's that all about", "nudge nudge".

The dull numerial reality is there's no strong evidence for a shift .. if anything it's more a "time and increasing sample sizes make for a clearer picture".

[beepbooptheory]

Maybe just think critically, without conspiracy about it for two seconds. With anything else, I'm sure you'd see the classic survivorship bias error you are making here.

[nuggets]

Could you elaborate on what you're alluding to, please?