|
|
|
|
|
by pseudalopex
1 day ago
|
|
> I don't consider it gatekeeping, rather prevention of making an irreversible choice while the frontal lobe is still far from knowing even what path it wants for itself for the rest of its life. To control access is gate keeping. Puberty blockers' effects are reversible generally. Puberty's effects are not. Gender affirming care regret rates are very low. > I know that might be seen as unfair to a lot of people, but given the persistence with which gender affirmation is being pushed, I feel that cases like me are simply considered collateral damage. Access to gender affirming care is pushed persistently because denial of gender affirming care was and is pushed persistently. And the benefits are significant. And regret rates are very low. Do you understand that no regretted treatment would require no treatment? What ratio of regretted treatment and regretted non treatment would you consider fair? |
|
You're trying to figure out a decent ratio, and I'd like the total number of regretted treatments to become a permanent flat zero.
A child brought into this world learns from those who have walked on it for much much longer. It puts TRUST into them. The moment you have a single regretted treatment, that moment you have a human life who got failed by everyone around them. The social system, the government system, the family system. Systematically encouraging things where a regretted treatment can very well mean a life destroyed is not something I can ever support.
One's perception that life dealt them inadequate set of cards should never result in a borderline-militant push for a systemic change that reduces regretted treatments to a ratio number.