I read that NYT article yesterday and was floored. So sloppy and unscientific, completely biased and just wrong. BUT the comments were soul warming (as well as your piece here). So many readers clapping back at the horrible and irresponsible reporting on this. Hard to believe NYT doesn't see the writing on the wall and all of the law suits that are sure to start piling up.
Thank you Lisa, this is a very good and succinct list of quotes which I intend to distribute to affirming family members and potentially doctors. Along with Genspect's Stats for Gender website. I'm so glad this conversation is finally starting to happen. Shame on the mainstream media for being cowards and ideologues.
Oh. And wait for the lawsuits in a few more years…. These young women and men have not received proper medical care in so many instances. And let’s not even get into the insanity of Lia Thomas swimming against women. We have gone mad. P.S. I am a Democrat and a Liberal thinker who works in the arts.
Thank you Lisa for your focus on this important topic. I truly don't understand how there is not more outrage regarding this topic. We are talking about children after all!
You are doing such important work. I’m glad I found you. I have been reading about this subject for years. The NY Times has been a joke in the way it reports on this subject. Journalists are cowering and afraid to seriously research what is happening to young people.
I feel like I've run out of comments to make on this topic. What more can be said? We just nod along as more information comes out, as more damage is done, as more time passes while the MSM make their meager, cowardly forays into the truth. Change is coming, we say, as we wait patiently and not so patiently. With so many willfully blind even to the evidence of no evidence, what ever will be enough to turn the tide if the concern over harming children isn't enough?
I am twice grateful for Lisa Selin Davis’s survey of the medical and psychiatric industry’s critical self-assessments of its sex-change activities. First—and joining with earlier commenters—for assembling telling excerpts from the negative professional findings on the irresponsible treatment of disturbed children.
Second—and not previously commented on—is providing examples of how the sloppy language of the scientific papers continues to promote the idea that sex can be physically changed. One way of doing this is through the quintessentially ambivalent word “gender.” One of the two meanings used by the relatively small world of scientists is “sex stereotypes,” or “sex roles,” and “sex-typical behavior,” all of which can be changed. But a second meaning of “gender” is overwhelmingly understood in the much larger world by the public as a genteel synonym for “sex” (which the public knows is unchangeable) but everyone is retaught this “gender” synonym for sex almost daily when checking the female or male boxes on personal information forms.
The other common way scientific readers are repeatedly taught subliminally that sex can be changed is by applying unnecessary qualifiers for the word “sex” beyond “male” and “female.” For example, Davis’s extracts from scientific papers refer to “natal” and “birth” sex which insidiously imply the possibility that “teenage” sex may be different from that at birth, i.e., a sex change. Then what does the scientifically used term “sex-reassigned” persons teach about the possibility of changing sex?
Worst, though, is many scientific papers seem to mix the two meanings of gender together—“sex” and “sex stereotypes”—without distinction. Therefore, for these reasons, the world would be a less-confusing, more intelligible place if the word “gender” were deprecated.
I read that NYT article yesterday and was floored. So sloppy and unscientific, completely biased and just wrong. BUT the comments were soul warming (as well as your piece here). So many readers clapping back at the horrible and irresponsible reporting on this. Hard to believe NYT doesn't see the writing on the wall and all of the law suits that are sure to start piling up.
I'd really love to see you do a point-by-point analysis of the recent, more-than-one-sided Times story you linked to.
Thank you Lisa, this is a very good and succinct list of quotes which I intend to distribute to affirming family members and potentially doctors. Along with Genspect's Stats for Gender website. I'm so glad this conversation is finally starting to happen. Shame on the mainstream media for being cowards and ideologues.
Oh. And wait for the lawsuits in a few more years…. These young women and men have not received proper medical care in so many instances. And let’s not even get into the insanity of Lia Thomas swimming against women. We have gone mad. P.S. I am a Democrat and a Liberal thinker who works in the arts.
Thank you Lisa for your focus on this important topic. I truly don't understand how there is not more outrage regarding this topic. We are talking about children after all!
Thank you for all you do!
You are doing such important work. I’m glad I found you. I have been reading about this subject for years. The NY Times has been a joke in the way it reports on this subject. Journalists are cowering and afraid to seriously research what is happening to young people.
another wonderful piece.
BOOM! Thank you! Wonderful collection of research findings to share!
Excellent compendium of research quotes here. Thanks, Lisa.
I feel like I've run out of comments to make on this topic. What more can be said? We just nod along as more information comes out, as more damage is done, as more time passes while the MSM make their meager, cowardly forays into the truth. Change is coming, we say, as we wait patiently and not so patiently. With so many willfully blind even to the evidence of no evidence, what ever will be enough to turn the tide if the concern over harming children isn't enough?
I am twice grateful for Lisa Selin Davis’s survey of the medical and psychiatric industry’s critical self-assessments of its sex-change activities. First—and joining with earlier commenters—for assembling telling excerpts from the negative professional findings on the irresponsible treatment of disturbed children.
Second—and not previously commented on—is providing examples of how the sloppy language of the scientific papers continues to promote the idea that sex can be physically changed. One way of doing this is through the quintessentially ambivalent word “gender.” One of the two meanings used by the relatively small world of scientists is “sex stereotypes,” or “sex roles,” and “sex-typical behavior,” all of which can be changed. But a second meaning of “gender” is overwhelmingly understood in the much larger world by the public as a genteel synonym for “sex” (which the public knows is unchangeable) but everyone is retaught this “gender” synonym for sex almost daily when checking the female or male boxes on personal information forms.
The other common way scientific readers are repeatedly taught subliminally that sex can be changed is by applying unnecessary qualifiers for the word “sex” beyond “male” and “female.” For example, Davis’s extracts from scientific papers refer to “natal” and “birth” sex which insidiously imply the possibility that “teenage” sex may be different from that at birth, i.e., a sex change. Then what does the scientifically used term “sex-reassigned” persons teach about the possibility of changing sex?
Worst, though, is many scientific papers seem to mix the two meanings of gender together—“sex” and “sex stereotypes”—without distinction. Therefore, for these reasons, the world would be a less-confusing, more intelligible place if the word “gender” were deprecated.