article by trans woman concerned about peer pressure to be trans

[KSera]

2 minutes ago, Frances said:

I have. They would be completely fine with people not using pronouns in signatures. His partner is also a racial minority, and they are definitely more moderate to right leaning when it comes to their view on such matters. For them at least, being gay is just part of who they are, not part of their identity.

I have found that there tend to be differences in this both depending on whether the person is gay vs trans and depending on age. The older gay family and friends I have are not in alignment on this practice with younger people (my older gay family members frequently ask me for reminders of what terms they are supposed to use and ask if they are doing it right--and when I say older, I just mean they aren't youth, but are people in their forties and fifties).

[1234]

6 hours ago, Baseballandhockey said:

I am far from an expert on this.  But I wonder if, somehow, this is what we need to figure out how to fix.  

I also wonder if communicating to kids who are exploring gender, or trying on transition, that social transition is a very big deal, forces them into a position where they are constantly needing to defend their position or their identity, if that makes it harder to try something different later.  

I did recently have a chat with Ds about how if all we’ve done thus far ended up being to just give him the space and time he needed to be comfortable and he changed course that we would 100% support him. I let him know that we wouldn’t regret anything because it was obviously what he needed at that time. He was receptive but let us know he has no second thoughts.

I think most parents know their kids best and some of us realize at some point that giving weight to some of those long term consequences people throw at us won’t matter if the kids won’t actually be here to experience them. Ds didn’t get excited about going to college until the last minute and he told us it’s because he just never pictured himself doing so because he didn’t think he’d still be here. After social transitioning, he was off all anxiety and depression meds and he’s been good since. I know it’s not the same for everyone but I hate to think of the kids like him that would be ignored by some the thoughts expressed here. 

[Frances]

8 minutes ago, Baseballandhockey said:

I'm confused by this.  My identity is made up of all the things I am.  I don't see how something could be part of one, and not part of the other.  Am I using the term wrong? 

Maybe I didn’t state it well. Of course it is one part of who they are, but definitely not the main or most important part. They don’t identify as gay, they just are gay. It’s not something you would ever know about either one unless you happened to ask about a spouse or partner. They are definitely not hiding it, they are both just completely comfortable and confident in who they are.

Edited January 9, 2022 by Frances

[Frances]

1 minute ago, KSera said:

I have found that there tend to be differences in this both depending on whether the person is gay vs trans and depending on age. The older gay family and friends I have are not in alignment on this practice with younger people (my older gay family members frequently ask me for reminders of what terms they are supposed to use and ask if they are doing it right--and when I say older, I just mean they aren't youth, but are people in their forties and fifties).

I definitely think this would be true. As far as I know, my son and his partner don’t even have any gay or lesbian friends, let alone trans ones. So they are definitely only speaking for themselves. 

[KSera]

3 minutes ago, Baseballandhockey said:

I'm confused by this.  My identity is made up of all the things I am.  I don't see how something could be part of one, and not part of the other.  Am I using the term wrong? 

I found the wording confusing as well, but I felt like I understood the underlying sentiment, as it aligns with how my gay family members operate in the world as far as their sexuality goes; it's not a central, defining thing for then, but is just something that is. Maybe kind of like I don't consider my nationality to be a defining thing for me, even though it is what it is.

[Frances]

3 minutes ago, KSera said:

I found the wording confusing as well, but I felt like I understood the underlying sentiment, as it aligns with how my gay family members operate in the world as far as their sexuality goes; it's not a central, defining thing for then, but is just something that is. Maybe kind of like I don't consider my nationality to be a defining thing for me, even though it is what it is.

Thank you. I removed two extra words to make it more clear what I meant.

[KSera]

6 minutes ago, Joker2 said:

I think most parents know their kids best and some of us realize at some point that giving weight to some of those long term consequences people throw at us won’t matter if the kids won’t actually be here to experience them. Ds didn’t get excited about going to college until the last minute and he told us it’s because he just never pictured himself doing so because he didn’t think he’d still be here. After social transitioning, he was off all anxiety and depression meds and he’s been good since. I know it’s not the same for everyone but I hate to think of the kids like him that would be ignored by some the thoughts expressed here. 

Transition has clearly been very successful for your ds. There has to be a middle ground though as far as giving weight to the long term consequences, because there are also a lot of kids who transition and don't have that kind of mental health turn around. None of the trans kids I know closely enough to know something of their mental health status have lost their anxiety or depression diagnoses by transitioning. Sometimes there is a honeymoon period where the depression has lightened, but I also know several who are struggling now more than ever. I think it can be extremely hard when they make this big change they have been building up to, but their problems are all still there, and the transition didn't solve them. That can be crushing. So, some will have your ds's experience, which is great, but what is being done for all of those who don't and now they have the long term consequences without anything having been solved?

[1234]

1 minute ago, KSera said:

Transition has clearly been very successful for your ds. There has to be a middle ground though as far as giving weight to the long term consequences, because there are also a lot of kids who transition and don't have that kind of mental health turn around. None of the trans kids I know closely enough to know something of their mental health status have lost their anxiety or depression diagnoses by transitioning. Sometimes there is a honeymoon period where the depression has lightened, but I also know several who are struggling now more than ever. I think it can be extremely hard when they make this big change they have been building up to, but their problems are all still there, and the transition didn't solve them. That can be crushing. So, some will have your ds's experience, which is great, but what is being done for all of those who don't and now they have the long term consequences without anything having been solved?

I’ve already said I definitely don’t have all the answers but I strongly disagree with stopping treatments completely, which seems to be what many want. I do think we have a lot to still figure out but I knew when my kid hit his point of no return and we had to do something. I know I’m not the only one.

I feel for those who have different experiences but I just disagree the answer is no treatment for anyone until we figure it out. There needs to be some way to treat these kids as we figure it out and therapy alone just doesn't work for many. I do think a common theme is that therapy isn’t done well in the beginning and we’re too focused on affirmation first. That needs to change but we need to come up with a point when they can move forward from therapy alone and I don’t agree that point is only adulthood.

[KSera]

2 minutes ago, Joker2 said:

 I do think a common theme is that therapy isn’t done well in the beginning and we’re too focused on affirmation first. That needs to change

Agree here. I think if we could at least start here, that would be a world of improvement better than where things currently are. But we’re far from there right now and it feels like a losing battle currently to get there because of the strong backlash against anyone expressing these concerns. I honestly do feel like we will get there, but my sense is that it’s going to be via enough of these kids growing up and speaking out against the way their distress was handled. 

[LMD]

1 minute ago, Joker2 said:

I’ve already said I definitely don’t have all the answers but I strongly disagree with stopping treatments completely, which seems to be what many want. I do think we have a lot to still figure out but I knew when my kid hit his point of no return and we had to do something. I know I’m not the only one.

I feel for those who have different experiences but I just disagree the answer is no treatment for anyone until we figure it out. There needs to be some way to treat these kids as we figure it out and therapy alone just doesn't work for many. I do think a common theme is that therapy isn’t done well in the beginning and we’re too focused on affirmation first. That needs to change but we need to come up with a point when they can move forward from therapy alone and I don’t agree that point is only adulthood.

That is a conversation I would love to have, but we weren't allowed to have it. Anything less than affirmation only gets you banned, slandered and in my state, possible jail time. Balance needs to return, and that can't happen if any questions continue to get assumed and labelled as partisan and bigoted.

another thing that I really think we need is a basic grounding in terms of biological reality. I personally am not bothered by adults transitioning, and I would be open to having my mind changed/compromise on older teens if the evidence is there (I don't believe it is, but I wouldn't insert myself between an ethical, thorough doctor and a family making the best decision in a tough spot, and I really really hope less brutal options than surgical transition are offered first). What I am absolutely unable to move forward from is the denial of biological reality. While there are male rapists in women's prisons then we have a problem. I remember in about 2012, discussions happening about using the word women for transwomen because 'we can still distinguish with the word female, and transwomen take on the social role of woman.'

I don't know what happened in the last 10 years, but humans aren't special, we have a mammalian reproductive system which comes in male and female. A body made for sperm producing is different from a body made for egg producing and that has an effect- both physiological and social. A sperm producer cannot become an egg producer or vice versa. This potential function isn't all we are but it is a significant part of how we exist as physical beings in this world. I won't deny trans' people's existence or experiences, I wish many on their side wouldn't deny this. It just makes any sort of common ground impossible. Trans people should know better than anyone that sex and gender are different. I'm so so tired of the circular, semantic games.

[1234]

28 minutes ago, KSera said:

Transition has clearly been very successful for your ds. There has to be a middle ground though as far as giving weight to the long term consequences, because there are also a lot of kids who transition and don't have that kind of mental health turn around. None of the trans kids I know closely enough to know something of their mental health status have lost their anxiety or depression diagnoses by transitioning. Sometimes there is a honeymoon period where the depression has lightened, but I also know several who are struggling now more than ever. I think it can be extremely hard when they make this big change they have been building up to, but their problems are all still there, and the transition didn't solve them. That can be crushing. So, some will have your ds's experience, which is great, but what is being done for all of those who don't and now they have the long term consequences without anything having been solved?

I’m quoting again because I don’t want it to seem to anyone that Ds doesn’t still struggle at times with anxiety and depression. He just doesn’t need medication for it now. Not that long ago we were doing something and he looked at us and said the body dysphoria was hitting him hard. It was his way of letting us know he was struggling and to be patient. It still happens but he’s better able to cope these days.

[LMD]

Also, to clarify. My position isn't stop/ban all forms of transition. My position is, be honest about new/increased presentations. Find and offer the most effective, least invasive treatments (because all medical intervention has risk/side effects, and some people with dysphoria need other options if medical transition is contraindicated).

[Melissa Louise]

1 hour ago, KSera said:

Agree here. I think if we could at least start here, that would be a world of improvement better than where things currently are. But we’re far from there right now and it feels like a losing battle currently to get there because of the strong backlash against anyone expressing these concerns. I honestly do feel like we will get there, but my sense is that it’s going to be via enough of these kids growing up and speaking out against the way their distress was handled. 

How can we start here, when we are so far beyond this?

Had we lived in the neighbouring state, for example, the psychotherapy my child received would be classed as conversion therapy and been illegal.

Good luck unwinding that conflation of good law (banning harmful and discredited gay conversion practices) with exploratory psychotherapy to untangle the roots of a sudden dysphoria. 

 

 

 

[KSera]

3 minutes ago, Melissa Louise said:

How can we start here, when we are so far beyond this?

Had we lived in the neighbouring state, for example, the psychotherapy my child received would be classed as conversion therapy and been illegal.

Good luck unwinding that conflation of good law (banning harmful and discredited gay conversion practices) with exploratory psychotherapy to untangle the roots of a sudden dysphoria. 

 

 

 

Yeah, I know 😞. Doesn’t mean I don’t wish we could. I do think coming to some agreement among people in general that this would be a place to start is at least helpful in moving slowly that direction. This is why I say my guess is that the shift will eventually be initiated from the inside (which I think we’re already seeing signs of the beginning of). It does feel a long way off, though. 

[Melissa Louise]

6 minutes ago, KSera said:

Yeah, I know 😞. Doesn’t mean I don’t wish we could. I do think coming to some agreement among people in general that this would be a place to start is at least helpful in moving slowly that direction. This is why I say my guess is that the shift will eventually be initiated from the inside (which I think we’re already seeing signs of the beginning of). It does feel a long way off, though. 

Maybe if it goes to the courts. In my opinion, that's why Anderson is positioning herself as she is now. Always good to get out in front of a looming scandal. 

 

[ktgrok]

2 hours ago, Frances said:

Thank you for your thoughtful response. Do you think #2 is only true in conservative areas or everywhere? I don’t live or work in a conservative area and my son is gay. So if that’s universally or even generally true, I certainly wouldn’t want anyone to think I’m a homophobic bigot.

I don't think not having pronouns in your signature would ever be seen as proof you are a homophobic bigot, just that if you DO include them it is a good sign you are not. So, an unknown vs a pretty good bet. 

1 hour ago, LMD said:

Also, to clarify. My position isn't stop/ban all forms of transition. My position is, be honest about new/increased presentations. Find and offer the most effective, least invasive treatments (because all medical intervention has risk/side effects, and some people with dysphoria need other options if medical transition is contraindicated).

This!

[KSera]

25 minutes ago, Melissa Louise said:

Maybe if it goes to the courts. In my opinion, that's why Anderson is positioning herself as she is now. Always good to get out in front of a looming scandal. 

 

Interesting thought. Do you think that goes for some of the other gender care doctors recently sounding the alarm? Marci Bowers comes to mind. 

 

[1234]

The court theory is definitely an interesting one and one I for sure don’t agree with. It is a big reason we’re moving to a blue state this summer though. Conservatives are running the courts here and I know how they feel about my Ds. Mine are both adults now but I just don’t want to live somewhere that would do want some want in this regard. Many of these kids actually need more options than some think they should have.

[Melissa Louise]

19 minutes ago, KSera said:

Interesting thought. Do you think that goes for some of the other gender care doctors recently sounding the alarm? Marci Bowers comes to mind. 

 

Yes. 

 

[Melissa Louise]

13 minutes ago, Joker2 said:

The court theory is definitely an interesting one and one I for sure don’t agree with. It is a big reason we’re moving to a blue state this summer though. Conservatives are running the courts here and I know how they feel about my Ds. Mine are both adults now but I just don’t want to live somewhere that would do want some want in this regard. Many of these kids actually need more options than some think they should have.

Patients suing doctors. You think a detransitioner should not be able to sue if sustaining injury from non evidence based treatment as s minor? 

[1234]

11 minutes ago, Melissa Louise said:

Patients suing doctors. You think a detransitioner should not be able to sue if sustaining injury from non evidence based treatment as s minor? 

I took your court reference to mean courts would interfere in regards to treatment, not lawsuits. That’s why we’re moving.  I don’t feel ok with courts deciding what treatments are allowed or not. I’ve always been fine with lawsuits against doctors and letting the courts decide if cases are legit for that particular individual.

Edited January 9, 2022 by Joker2

[LMD]

Affirmation only laws actually limit options. As soon as the magic word 'gender' is said, the pathway options are limited to exactly 1.

[Melissa Louise]

I wish we could just rewind to first principles. 

Gender dysphoria is rare. Most childhood onset dysphoria resolves post-puberty without treatment. 

Sudden onset in adolescence is a new type of presentation, poorly understood. People ought not be maligned for investigating potential causes. 

There is no conclusive  evidence about what causes dysphoria. 

Hormonal and surgical transition of adults is a treatment of last resort. 

People without dysphoria who 'transition' are merely cross dressing males ( and occasionally females) 

Sex exists, is observable, immutable, and matters. 

It's ok to be same sex attracted.

Nobody needs to perform sex stereotypes. 

 

[SKL]

6 hours ago, Melissa Louise said:

Yes. 

I think people find it very hard to accept that some of us reject a lot of this because we think it is regressive.

Been trying to explain this to my kids.  Well, they've never really lived in a world where sex/gender is limiting like it was for how many centuries.  Never have they been told "this is only for boys" or "girls like ___," at least not by adults in real life.  It's sad and strange to see young people impose these restrictions on their own generation for no good reason.

Makes me wonder what the older generations missed when trying to eliminate the gender barriers for girls.

It also makes me wonder who, on the internet, stands to gain from this influence.

[SKL]

3 hours ago, ktgrok said:

I don't think not having pronouns in your signature would ever be seen as proof you are a homophobic bigot, just that if you DO include them it is a good sign you are not. So, an unknown vs a pretty good bet.

This might depend on whether it's a rule of the organization that everyone has to include their preferred pronouns in their signature.  (Last week I got my first email signed like that, but it was from an employee of a liberal county government.  The name was very feminine, and the preferred pronouns were she/her.  So IMO that doesn't prove anything.)

I think it's unhelpful, since I would use the pronoun "you" in any email to any person.  When I talk in 3rd person about someone I don't know, I go by their name (i.e. Mary is she).  There are names that aren't obvious (mine is one).  This is not new, and I have ways of handling this until I learn the person's gender.

I don't know about others, but I have a hard enough time remembering names and faces without trying to memorize favorite pronouns.  Is this trend creating a new opportunity for people to be offended by innocent behavior?  Perhaps the other sources of offense are getting old?

PS I'm not a homophobic bigot.  The close person to me who is gay might be, since he scoffs at this pronoun stuff.

Maybe I need to start signing "not a homophobic bigot" just to be on the safe side.

[SKL]

I also find it ironic how we are conflating transphobia and homophobia, in the same thread that discusses concerns about homophobia in the trans community.

[Frances]

24 minutes ago, SKL said:

  Is this trend creating a new opportunity for people to be offended by innocent behavior?  Perhaps the other sources of offense are getting old?

PS I'm not a homophobic bigot.  The close person to me who is gay might be, since he scoffs at this pronoun stuff.

Maybe I need to start signing "not a homophobic bigot" just to be on the safe side.

I’m struggling to even come up with words to describe how I feel about this rant in response to my sincere and honest question. I’ll just say it’s the opposite in tone to @regentrude’s thoughtful and sincere response and does nothing to increase understanding or honest dialogue.

Edited January 9, 2022 by Frances

[SKL]

3 minutes ago, Frances said:

I’m struggling to even come up with words to describe how I feel about this rant in response to my sincere and honest question. I’ll just say it’s the opposite in tone to @regentrude’s thoughtful and sincere response and does nothing to increase understanding or honest dialogue.

I guess I didn't appreciate the implication that people are homophobic / transphobic bigots unless explicitly stated otherwise.

[Frances]

Just now, SKL said:

I guess I didn't appreciate the implication that people are homophobic / transphobic bigots unless explicitly stated otherwise.

And you chose such a thoughtful way to express it.

I also think you are flipping and taking to an extreme statements that were made saying that using pronouns in email signatures can be a sign that you are a gay ally. Please show me where anyone said what you claim above.

[SKL]

2 minutes ago, Frances said:

And you chose such a thoughtful way to express it.

I also think you are flipping and taking to an extreme statements that were made saying that using pronouns in email signatures can be a sign that you are a gay ally. Please show me where anyone said what you claim above.

I'm not taking anything to an extreme, nor was I ranting.  Not sure what filter you are reading my comments through.

I'm not going to respond to you any further on this thread.

[Frances]

1 minute ago, SKL said:

I'm not taking anything to an extreme, nor was I ranting.  Not sure what filter you are reading my comments through.

I'm not going to respond to you any further on this thread.

I guess that means you can’t defend your claim. No problem, nothing new.

Edited January 9, 2022 by Frances

[Melissa Louise]

For goodness sake, pronouns have nothing to do with being gay or a gay ally. 

 

[regentrude]

1 hour ago, Melissa Louise said:

For goodness sake, pronouns have nothing to do with being gay or a gay ally. 

 

That is why I put my disclaimer that I am aware of that fact; However, several friends in the LGBTQ community ( and articles/websites of advocacy organizations) have assured me that an implicit connection is understood.

Is it possible that culturally things are perhaps different where you are? (I recall us disagreeing before about the use of the term "queer" which for many  folx here is their preferred umbrella term for self-labeling, while you understood it in its derogatory meaning). 

[Carrie12345]

Plenty of people have made real efforts to outline their stances as clearly and directly as possible, and yet I still struggle to understand where the real divide is. I’m not asking for a re-explaining, just stating that I am lost.

People, whatever their age, are individuals. Whatever larger category they may fit into, their needs are specific to them. We do our best with what we know, and we should always be open to finding more to know. 🤷‍♀️ 

Decisions made between families and professionals aren’t really for me to question.  And yet, I am open to questioning a professional’s background. Is that really unusual, though? I think few would deny that there ARE quacks out there, in any and all specialties.

My only personal rule is to respect whatever social presentations I’ve been made aware of. I’m not about to knowingly make someone uncomfortable in my presence on purpose.

Beyond that, I’m in no way qualified to say what’s “real” and what’s “not”, or what the best psych or medical approaches might be for any one person.  Well, other than to say it’s probably best for that person, their family, and their professional team to be on the same page. Obviously, that can be a tall order though.

No matter what else we learn, I can’t imagine there will ever be a single-route “best practice” that suits every individual, even if it were accessible to all.

[TravelingChris]

13 hours ago, Frances said:

Thank you for your thoughtful response. Do you think #2 is only true in conservative areas or everywhere? I don’t live or work in a conservative area and my son is gay. So if that’s universally or even generally true, I certainly wouldn’t want anyone to think I’m a homophobic bigot.

I am in a  moderately conservative area and do not work so don't have the issue of mandated pronouns.  Which is really good since with my brain fog issues, this whole pronoun thing is not a good development for me (as is the whole trend to use symbols instead of writing).  I think trying to determine that someone is a homophobic bigot because they don't do pronoun listing is a very misguided venture.  There are a lot of people who are having a hard time changing and nothing to do with bigotry or anything like that.  

[SanDiegoMom]

11 hours ago, ktgrok said:

I don't think not having pronouns in your signature would ever be seen as proof you are a homophobic bigot, just that if you DO include them it is a good sign you are not. So, an unknown vs a pretty good bet. 

 

Having pronouns is problematic to me as it signals belief in gender ideology (nothing about gay/lesbian allyship- those should really not be conflated) and smacks of tribalism (in/out groups). It is a political statement, and is divisive IMO.  I mean, just reading the statement that pronouns or lack thereof can signal bigotry or not is frightening to me. Like,  if I don’t have a pride flag out during pride month I am also a bigot? Or if I don’t stand during the pledge I am not patriotic? 
 

Edited January 9, 2022 by SanDiegoMom

[Frances]

3 hours ago, SanDiegoMom said:

Having pronouns is problematic to me as it signals belief in gender ideology (nothing about gay/lesbian allyship- those should really not be conflated) and smacks of tribalism (in/out groups). It is a political statement, and is divisive IMO.  I mean, just reading the statement that pronouns or lack thereof can signal bigotry or not is frightening to me. Like,  if I don’t have a pride flag out during pride month I am also a bigot? Or if I don’t stand during the pledge I am not patriotic? 
 

I certainly appreciate all of the responses to my question. Not surprisingly, they seem to fall on both sides and I think for now leaves me where I was before, somewhere in the middle. I haven’t yet seen an answer that really resonates with how I feel, but I am guessing the different responses do capture the feelings and views of many others where I work. And I’m still reading and learning  and pondering and thinking.

Edited January 9, 2022 by Frances

[goldberry]

13 hours ago, LMD said:

Affirmation only laws actually limit options. As soon as the magic word 'gender' is said, the pathway options are limited to exactly 1.

Would someone please share what states have these laws that would make psychotherapy for trans persons illegal?  I don't think I've ever heard that and would like to read about it to confirm exactly what that means.

[Danae]

3 hours ago, TravelingChris said:

 I think trying to determine that someone is a homophobic bigot because they don't do pronoun listing is a very misguided venture.  There are a lot of people who are having a hard time changing and nothing to do with bigotry or anything like that.  

Literally no one said this.  Not having pronouns listed signifies nothing. Having pronouns listed does signify something.  If I have an Ilhan Omar sign in my yard during election season I am very unlikely to be an Islamophobic bigot.  But not having one doesn’t mean I am an Islamophobic bigot; it conveys no information on that question whatsoever.  

[1234]

49 minutes ago, goldberry said:

Would someone please share what states have these laws that would make psychotherapy for trans persons illegal?  I don't think I've ever heard that and would like to read about it to confirm exactly what that means.

I’m honestly not sure, but my state actually submitted a bill just this month hoping to make it illegal for health care professionals to be affirming so it’s the exact opposite. It’s just one of the reasons we’re leaving as soon as oldest graduates this May.

ETA: That same bill in my state says health professionals shouldn’t be allowed to affirm/reinforce a minor’s sexual attraction either so I’m not sure how far they’re hoping to go. Sounds like it would also affect kids in therapy trying to work out any LGBTQ+ issues. So, no help for any of these minors here I guess.

Edited January 9, 2022 by Joker2

[SanDiegoMom]

14 minutes ago, goldberry said:

Would someone please share what states have these laws that would make psychotherapy for trans persons illegal?  I don't think I've ever heard that and would like to read about it to confirm exactly what that means.

It is illegal here in California.

Here are the policies informing my son's therapist when I pressed her on her approach with my son regarding his gender questioning:

https://williamsinstitute.law.ucla.edu/wp-content/uploads/Conversion-Therapy-Jan-2018.pdf

https://www.apadivisions.org/division-44/resources/conversion-fact-sheet.pdf

From the APA document: 

“Conversion therapy” describes any attempt to change a person’s sexual orientation or gender identity or expression, or any component of these. It is sometimes called reparative therapy, reorientation therapy, sexual orientation change efforts, or gender identity change efforts. Proponents have rebranded the practice and adapted their claims about it over time in response to sustained critiques. Same-gender or -sex attraction, gender non-conformity, and identifying as a sexual or gender minority (e.g., being lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer, another sexual or gender minority; LGBTQ+) are not illnesses and do not need treatment. These practices are not “therapy.”

From the Williams Institute document:

Conversion therapy has been practiced in the U.S. for over a century. Academic literature has documented instances of conversion therapy being used as early as the 1890s and continuing through the present day.10 Throughout the history of conversion therapy, a range of techniques have been used by both health care professionals and religious figures seeking to change people’s sexual orientation or gender identity. Currently, talk therapy is the most commonly used therapy technique. 11 Some practitioners have also used “aversion treatments, such as inducing nausea, vomiting, or paralysis; providing electric shocks; or having the individual snap an elastic band around the wrist when the individual became aroused to same-sex erotic images or thoughts.”12 Other practitioners have used non-aversive techniques such as attempting to “change 2 CONVERSION THERAPY AND LGBT YOUTH thought patterns by reframing desires, redirecting thoughts, or using hypnosis."

When we talked with the therapist over zoom, she reiterated that by law she was not allowed to question my son's statement that he was trans, but could only work with him on alleviating the distress around that identity.  

It is distressing to me to see laws that lump together sexual orientation with gender.  Sexual orientation does not change any essential aspect of a person and requires no long term medicalization and sterilization.  This law handcuffs therapists and provides one route -- immediate medicalization without exploration of possible past trauma or comorbid Autism, OCD,  ADHD, etc.  All which can play some sort of role in trans identification. 

Here is a letter written by a gender exploratory therapist in Oregon, who is attempting to walk the very fine line between affirmation and "conversion" therapy without losing her license.  

https://stephaniewinn.substack.com/p/my-letter-to-the-oregon-board-of

From her letter:

"I do not practice conversion therapy according to any definition. I have worked with many gender questioning and trans and nonbinary identified individual adolescents and adults. I was trained in and practiced the “affirmative” model, though I grew increasingly concerned about it as time went on. It has not been my experience that mental health has improved following transition in the people I have worked with. Many of them found their distress only worsened, but I felt my hands were tied and I could not explore how they felt about their trans identity and body. [Information from letter redacted as it pertains to a clinical case.]

[regentrude]

3 hours ago, SanDiegoMom said:

Having pronouns is problematic to me as it signals belief in gender ideology (nothing about gay/lesbian allyship- those should really not be conflated) and smacks of tribalism (in/out groups). It is a political statement, and is divisive IMO.  I mean, just reading the statement that pronouns or lack thereof can signal bigotry or not is frightening to me. Like,  if I don’t have a pride flag out during pride month I am also a bigot? 

But isn't it up to the LGBTQ folx to decide what they want to interpret as signs of allyship? 
Nobody said that not doing xyz (having pronouns/having pride flag/wearing rainbow stickers) is a sign of being a bigot. 
Some people are grateful for these subtle indications that a person can safely assumed to be an ally. Maybe that's not necessary elsewhere.  I can only listen to my friends and hear what makes them feel supported.

[SanDiegoMom]

11 minutes ago, Joker2 said:

I don’t know of any in the US. I’m not sure how it works elsewhere.

My state actually submitted a bill just this month hoping to make it illegal for health care professionals to be affirming so it’s the exact opposite. It’s just one of the reasons we’re leaving as soon as oldest graduates this May.

20 states have conversion therapy bills. Canada just passed a conversion therapy bill as well.

I would be absolutely against a bill that makes affirmation only illegal as well.  That is ridiculous.  I am just frustrated that now talk therapy is labeled as conversion therapy.  People are more complex, their needs are more complex.    

[1234]

3 minutes ago, SanDiegoMom said:

20 states have conversion therapy bills. Canada just passed a conversion therapy bill as well.

I would be absolutely against a bill that makes affirmation only illegal as well.  That is ridiculous.  I am just frustrated that now talk therapy is labeled as conversion therapy.  People are more complex, their needs are more complex.    

I actually agree. I do think some of the talk regarding trans youth is too close to conversion therapy for my liking, but professionals should have some leeway to figure out for sure what’s going on. I’m not in support of laws in either direction that make it difficult for health professionals to do their jobs.

Edited January 9, 2022 by Joker2

[SanDiegoMom]

16 minutes ago, regentrude said:

But isn't it up to the LGBTQ folx to decide what they want to interpret as signs of allyship? 
Nobody said that not doing xyz (having pronouns/having pride flag/wearing rainbow stickers) is a sign of being a bigot. 
Some people are grateful for these subtle indications that a person can safely assumed to be an ally. Maybe that's not necessary elsewhere.  I can only listen to my friends and hear what makes them feel supported.

Maybe it is different in the Midwest, where it sounds like it is a much more conservative area and you would need those subtle signs.  Just like when I lived in a much more red area it was so rare to meet someone who was also none religious, as the majority were not only Christian but evangelical.  It was very isolating.

Here pronouns in a bio just feels very performative and virtue signaling.  

Edited January 9, 2022 by SanDiegoMom

[SanDiegoMom]

DP

Edited January 9, 2022 by SanDiegoMom

[KSera]

52 minutes ago, goldberry said:

Would someone please share what states have these laws that would make psychotherapy for trans persons illegal?  I don't think I've ever heard that and would like to read about it to confirm exactly what that means.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_U.S._jurisdictions_banning_conversion_therapy
 

It’s not that therapy for trans people is illegal, it’s that addressing any underlying issues that might suggest the person isn’t actually the opposite gender is considered conversion therapy. Which is clearly problematic for gender questioning young people, many of whom have a number of co-occurring issues, but those often go unaddressed due to the fear of losing a license due to that being construed as conversion therapy. 
 

It’s a problem that sexual orientation conversion therapy has been conflated with gender dysphoria treatment. Totally different issues and one has profound medical implications when the other doesn’t. 

[regentrude]

4 minutes ago, SanDiegoMom said:

Maybe it is different in the Midwest, where it sounds like it is a much more conservative area and you would need those subtle signs.  Just like when I lived in a much more red area it was so rare to meet someone who was also none religious, as the majority were not only Christian but evangelical.  It was very isolating.

Yes, that is exactly the kind of rural place I live in.

[KSera]

3 minutes ago, regentrude said:

Yes, that is exactly the kind of rural place I live in.

I can see that in the places where it's less common for people to do it, doing so would carry more meaning. It's pretty standard where I am. I've shared before that there are times here where it does feel performative. I have a weekly group online I'm part of, and we are directed to give our name and pronouns when we first speak each week. This group is a consistent group, with every month or two maybe a new person joining (it's not something just open to the public). These are all other people in my age group, and after a year of participation, there has been yet to be anyone whose pronouns are anything other than what people would naturally default to, and we are introducing ourselves with pronouns week after week, and it definitely feels performative. I think we should do it when a new person joins the group, and then drop it until the next time someone new joins, but whatever. For a group of college aged people, I can see it being far more relevant to do weekly.

[Frances]

20 minutes ago, SanDiegoMom said:

Maybe it is different in the Midwest, where it sounds like it is a much more conservative area and you would need those subtle signs.  Just like when I lived in a much more red area it was so rare to meet someone who was also none religious, as the majority were not only Christian but evangelical.  It was very isolating.

Here pronouns in a bio just feels very performative and virtue signaling.  

And I feel like I live and work somewhere in between what you are both describing.