Looks like ultra-leftists will have something “new” to cancel, especially since the recent publication is one that contravenes their very militant ideology with regards to gender.
Specifically, the Gender Exploratory Therapy Association (GETA) recently released “A Clinical Guide for Therapists Working with Gender-Questioning Youth,” which can be reviewed in its entirety here.
Might not be a bad idea to download the file, actually, given the zeal with which leftists love to censor, scrubbing the Internet completely free of any inconvenient truths that may happen to arise.
And quite a few inconvenient truths are embedded in the text of this well-researched guide.
In a nutshell, the guide discourages “gender affirmations” via medical transitions for allegedly transgender youth as a first resort, instead implying that such extreme measures should be taken as a last resort.
Indeed, the introduction makes it quite clear that the guide will hardly be a gung ho advocacy booklet for surgery, especially for individuals under the age of 12.
Yes, that’s right: Some far-left militants apparently want these “surgeries” to begin even before individuals hit adolescence, and one can only imagine the lifelong ramifications of a child’s “decision” in that regard.
A decision fostered by the mainstream media and the left, that is.
While the militants aren’t interesting in exploring alternative views, the GETA guide most certainly is.
“The exploratory approach outlined here stands in contrast to the ‘gender-affirmative approach,’ which has gained popularity in recent years. The gender-affirmative approach assumes that minors presenting with a wish to live in a gender role different from their sex are transgender, and that the primary role of the therapist is to help minors transition. Transition consists of varying combinations of social transition, medical interventions, and surgical procedures,” the introduction states.
In other words, the guide suggests that therapists do not automatically accept a 12-year-old’s “new gender” just because they happen to “feel” that way.
While feelings constitute a core argument for the left, they do not for most sane people.
Speaking of sanity, the guide also highlights the insanity of the current trans movement, illustrating the utter house of cards upon which it is based.
Specifically, the guide reveals how a grand total of two Dutch studies from 2011 and 2014 have served as the basis for the entire trans movement today.
The type of “science” Brandon looks for, apparently.
“These two studies showed that high-functioning Dutch minors with an early-childhood onset of persistent and consistent gender dysphoria, who were medically transitioned after reaching mid-puberty, functioned well after their final surgery at the average age of 21,” the guide reported.
What Democrats don’t inform the general public is the fact that several other studies tried, and failed, to replicate the same results of the Dutch studies, illustrating multiple years ago that gender transition surgery probably isn’t the greatest idea for youth already struggling from mental issues.
“An attempt to replicate the successes reported by the Dutch researchers was undertaken at the world’s largest pediatric clinic in the UK, but also failed to demonstrate the psychological improvements reported by the Dutch. There are also significant uncertainties about whether the findings of the Dutch studies are applicable to the current cohort of youth presenting with gender dysphoria,” the guide added.
No kidding. Especially since the “current cohort” has been brainwashed by social media and the Brandon administration, neither of which was a pervasive influence several years ago.
On top of that, the guide even calls into question the validity of the Dutch studies themselves, noting rather obvious “bias” that defined each one.
“There is general scientific consensus that the two Dutch studies, as well as several other studies that followed them, suffer from serious methodological problems, including a high risk of bias due to small sample sizes, lack of control groups, and poor study designs,” the guide continued.
Translation: These so-called “studies” were done with an obvious agenda in mind, with researchers determined to achieve their predetermined ideological outcome, no matter what.
Even if it takes a tiny sample size, terribly study design, and no control group comparison whatsoever to achieve it.
Real stellar, objective “science.”
Elsewhere in the guide, the authors highlight other inconvenient truths regarding transgender “interventions” for children, including serious detriments to mental and physical health.
Specifically, these “medical transitions,” oftentimes entailing puberty blockers and high-risk surgeries, come with a huge array of risks, including “compromised bone density and brain development, cardiovascular complications, neoplasms, and other dangers.”
In addition, the egregious mental impact of these “transitions” is also evident, especially when they are commenced in literal 10-year-olds.
“This means that children as young as 9-12 may be waiving their future right to sexual function and reproduction long before they are mature enough to comprehend the importance of these functions. This is especially alarming since gender-related distress is a common developmental phase of many pre-gay youth who may not discover their sexual orientation until they are more mature,” the guide continued, underscoring the dangerous of puberty blockers.
Puberty blockers that woke doctors hand out like candy, sadly. All to look “cool” to their progressive peers.
After all, it’s all about the collective mentality for the left, with little to no tolerance for any form of intellectual diversity.
However, Lisa Marchiano, a licensed therapist a co-author of the new guidance, illustrates why individualized approaches are crucial for youth struggling with their gender identity, in no small part thanks to the media’s militant gender ideology.
“Just like any other patient, gender distressed youth deserve individualized treatment that leaves room for a full therapeutic process and doesn’t come with any fixed agenda,” Marchiano said pointedly, undoubtedly referring to the same “agenda” that drove the two Dutch studies in the first place.
Not to mention the agenda of making everyone the same, which would certainly explain why the left has no interest in individualized solutions for youth struggling with serious issues.
Author: Ofelia Thornton