That definitely is a strange post... They're more or less saying that more females should go on T so they can have body positivity... Because not wanting certain effects of T is "body negativity"? The idea that body negativity applies to a hypothetical body that you don't currently have is pretty ridiculous, as well as the idea that you should learn to accept that body type (eg, hairier) by changing your body and taking T.

I feel about "period envy" the same way I feel about people saying they're jealous of women who've been raped or sexually harassed. I don't think having those feelings makes you a bad person, but the oppression olympics element of claiming your oppressed because of your lack of a stigmatised biological fuction/claiming your oppressed because you're too ugly to be raped is just heinously out of touch.

I think trans people are overrepresented on the left because any conversation about negatives of puberty blockers, hormones and surgery is actively shut down, also there's no expectation to pass, you could have a beard but so long as your pronouns are she, you can be a trans women, whereas on the right, eg, blaire white, you have to attempt to or successfully pass to be an 'honorary woman'.

Many people believe that this case proves that "Gender identity" does exist because Reimer rejected being a girl due to his inner gender identity. Radical feminists and conservative people believe that this case disproves the theory of "Gender identity". What do you think about the David Reimer case?

If David rejected the concept of being a girl, people will say, "look, this proves he has a male gender identity, gender ideology is right". And if David accepted the concept of being a girl people will say "look, he has a female gender identity, gender ideology is right".

It seems to me that a lot of teens and young adults who identity as trans are getting 'gender affirming' surgery for a lot of motivations, including still being on their parents insurance, or still being young enough that their parents will pay for it.

The same way trans ideology has smuggled "watching and waiting" into the literal first step of the idyllic child transition; puberty blockers, TRAs smuggle the "watching and waiting" for surgery into initial surgical consults. After this point, it will require the child/teen to say "no" to change their mind, which takes a lot more psychologically than saying yes. Just put yourself in the shoes of a child, perhaps your in the room with just the surgeon, or your surgeon and a parent, you know your parents will be paying for the surgery since they let you come here, now imagine you're saying no to the surgeon. Surgical consults are the first step towards surgery.

Trans children are a "stock narrative". People are sold this idea that you give a child the "life saving" diagnosis/identity that they are trans, then you "pause" their puberty using "puberty blockers" giving them "time to decide if they're a boy or a girl", and then help them transition (ignoring the fact something like 98% of those who take blockers will transition and that these blockers have permanent side effects). And of course the child can experience the joy of attempting to keep their transition secret, perhaps changing schools, perhaps they will have to make up a lie explaining why they don't know much about menstruation. And when you're done, the mtf teenager is as close to female as a male could ever be, they are the "perfect" transsexual, passing, living out their school years as "a girl", doing romanticised 'girlhood' things like sleepovers and makeup, and ready for the final surgery (which doctors prefer to do mtf srs on people still in school since they have more time for the dilation). People want to project this narrative onto their children or other peoples children. People are deluding themselves into believing they're saving their childrens lives.

Trans allies reject the claim trans identity is a disease while at the same time pushing the idea you need "early intervention to save lives" (something which tends to only apply to diseases)... And this "cure" is never questioned whatsoever even though society treats gender dysphoria as a disease. Why have the establishments collectively decided that there are no problems with this 'stock narrative' cure? Why are all three steps, childhood diagnosis, blockers then hormones necessary if "happy trans adults" exist? If the children had informed consent, they would go straight to hormones or not take blockers at all, what benefit is there to having to sequentially take two different sterilising drugs and experiencing the side effects of both, when you really only want the aesthetic effects of the second? And what about the effects lupron has on the body height in females? Why is this "stock narrative" supposed to apply to both females and males equally? If this stock narrative/cure had orginally been intended for females, wouldn't growth hormones be a core part so you can pass as male better?

IMO, I think 60-90% of people who believe in transgender identity politics (not 'live and let live' people, but people seriously believe that you can change your sex and that everyone has to discover which gender and pronouns is 'right for them'), especially younger people, will come to the conclusion that they're trans or non-binary. There's no trend or mass hysteria working its way through friend groups in schools, instead some friend groups who all have the same ideology, who happen to all believe you can change your gender/sex, naturally come to the conclusion that they can/should change theirs.

PS there are 0 studies proving AGP is real. In fact, it's an unfalsifiable theory that can't be proven. It might as well be a religion.

How the heck is AGP unfalsifiable? First you have to separate the two claims, a) that mtfs can be categorised int AGP and HSTS and b) that some mtf transexuals experience a sexual paraphilia around the idea of female or becoming female. While I think there could be strong arguments against A, I don't really think there's any argument against B... Its just obviously true, obviously some people have sex fetishes, and in this day and age, more and more people act these fetishes out.

Plenty of people who transitioned or detransitioned identify as AGP, so if you accept the claim that some people can be trans because they identify as trans, then you should except that some people are agp because they identify as such.

I go with scientific consensus, not what my feefees tell me.

That's a bit rich. I'd like to see what scientific consensus looks like when trans science stops being biased, it seems to be comparable to tabacco-funded research on the effects of cigarettes as of now.

Noticeable incongruence between the gender that the patient sees themselves are, and what their classified gender assignment

An intense need to do away with his or her primary or secondary sex features (or, in the case of young teenagers, to avert the maturity of the likely secondary features)

An intense desire to have the primary or secondary sex features of the other gender A deep desire to transform into another gender ... (abridged)

While you can sit around defining gender dysphoria to satisfy whatever transmedicalist allies you keep, the assumption genital reassignment surgeries cure/abate 'true gender dysphoria' is still unfounded.

they would likely have had weak chins, tiny jaws, narrow shoulders, and would’ve been 5’6 or 5’7.

I'm tired of this "FTMs wish they were gigachads" thing TRAs and apparantly detransitioners like to pull. No, the ftm, on average, wants to look exactly like what you just said, normal female jaws, normal female shoulders, moderately tall for a female, with a full head of hair, except with no tits and a typical male waist to hip ratio. And many FTMs, especially the "trenders" are likely planning on stopping T once hair loss begins. They don't come out of transition looking like incel males, they come out looking like females on testosterone.