@93 You are missing criteria. They expect a threshold of items to be met, otherwise, it does not meet the diagnosis. Please tell me you aren't siding with pansack that a girl that likes to dress in masculine clothing, but meets no other criteria should be considered GD and, according to them therefore, trans as well.

The thing is a GID/GD diagnosis is not, and has never been enough for a WPATH clinician to suggest social transition. So why are we pretending GD = trans, and people who do not even meet GD diagnosis are GD and also trans. There are 4 kids out of the 127 that socially transitioned. They all persisted. That's the reality of social transitioning. It's rare among gender non-conforming kids, and detransition from childhood social transition is rarely seen in practice.
The article does listen to transgender people. Those who have had a different experience and also those who question that experience and what it means. It's fair and balanced and the author put a lot of consideration into it. Something she didn't have to do. It's ludicrous to suggest that people can't mention or consider the experiences of detransitioners in the media. Critical discussion is not hate speech. It's an opportunity for transgender people to argue their own perspective. It's not about 'cisgender' people being defensive about their feelings. It's about free speech. If a single, fair and balanced article supposedly causes violence against transgender people them we better get to banning any media that promotes or trivializes violence against women, transwomen and men, and other minority groups. For example why aren't the liberal left concerned about the global, billion dollar porn and sex industries which exposes women and transwomen in particular to sexual exploitation, objectification and violence? You can't argue that's harmless freedom of speech while a mere article in some obscure magazine is going to cause transgender people untold violence.
Thanks for your book and your willingness to shed light on truth. As a nurse, I am appalled at the escalating use of prescriptions of puberty blockers (whose long-term effects are unknown) for children. Let these children grow and make choices when they are truly old enough and able to make informed decisions.

I am not aware of any supplemental definition of "children with a persistent binary-leaning transgender identity" that is being or has been used in any study of GID or GD.

You seem to be arguing for the gender-affirming clinical approach, which as far as I'm aware is not particularly controversial in the scientific community (nor exhaustively studied, as it's relatively new. As for the non-scientific community... well, we're not having a conversation about the witch-burners here).

For children with severe GD, social transitioning may well be a highly effective therapeutic approach (though I'd hesitate to draw that conclusion from a sample size of 4). What seems to be clear from the literature, however, is that not socially transitioning children with severe GD has an outcome of better than 50% -- i.e. the persistence rate of GD appears to be lower than 50% regardless of severity or treatment protocol (if any).
@101 Not a scientific term, some trans people say they are binary or lean binary to communicate they strongly identify as a man or women. And yes, I am talking about gender-affirming clinical approach which is inline with WPATH recommendations and does not assume the childhood GD test alone is a good marker for kids to socially transition.

My problem with this article is it presents a study about kids evaluated for GD as if it represents trans-kids recommended for social transition by the medical community. First, having GD/GID is not a good proxy for trans-kids recommended for a social transition by WPATH guidelines. That's not how transgender care works. Second, even the presented number is misleading because 37% (47/127) of the kids didn't even meet the criteria for GD/GID. So now this article is using a proxy for socially transitioned trans-kids as kids that met the criteria for GID AND semi-gender-nonconforming kids whose parents were concerned by their cross-gender play but ultimately did not meet the criteria. It's an incredibly misleading proxy.

Parents of socially transitioning kids get all kinds of accusations of child abuse. Last thing they need are more people citing an inappropriate statistic that there is a 2/3rds chance their kid will grow out of it.
@106 gd was never gid, and all the kids had gd (how does one get "referred and diagnosed in childhood" to/at the 'Center of Expertise on Gender Dysphoria'? how does one desist from something one never had?).

my bad to not write 'social' as in 'social transition' oops, but worse was my not writing that this was based on a parent-answer at the time of first evaluation at the clinic (in childhood), that is, before they were persister or desister (in adolescence). that is, none of the 4 actually id'd themselves transitioned or not in the study.

is there such thing as a 'trans child'? if yes, and gender dysphoria is closely associated with being trans, based on the rather limited data available including this study, we can only guess which kids may be trans; this 'yes' is actually a fuzzy 'maybe'. if yes and gd is not, it does not matter if a kid is trans or not because they can just say "yes, i wear 'masculine clothing' because i'm trans, yet, in equal proportion to this conviction, i have no predilection to alter this form my body to fit these clothes. however; and truly; to this freedom of being seven years old, i shall cling, o, shall i cling." this is a 'yes' of 'hell yeah kid whatever sure you have fun'. if no, that is an admission that social factors determine who is trans or not, and hormone blockers for the sake of gendering should be illegal for children.
Okay, I looked into the studies being used to back the "80% of trans kids will stop being trans" thing. That's just not what these studies say. A better summary would be "80% of kids with gender dysphoria never are trans at all." The ones who ever are trans -- who identify as a non-birth sex -- usually stay trans.

The Steensma 2013 JAACAP has data on children who "behave like the opposite sex" versus those who don't (who identify as their birth gender but are unhappy with it). The ones who are 'acting trans' are something like 38 times more likely[*] to come back for surgery later than those who aren't. In all their data dimensions, this keeps showing up, the ones who reach a point you'd call "trans" are likely to stay that way.

Quote from the article:
"When asked with what sex they identified (“Are you a boy or a girl?”), children who expressed cross-gender identification had a greater chance of persisting GD. [...] Persisters indicated that they believed that they were the “other” sex, and the desisters indicated they wished they were the “other” sex. [...] explicitly asking children with GD with which sex they identify seems to be of great value in predicting a future outcome for both boys and girls with GD."


This is not semantic nitpicking, there is a big difference between "80% of trans children" and "80% of children who are unhappy with their gender roles." The data says there's a big difference. The data says if a child says and acts trans, they probably are in the long run, which is a big difference from thinking it'll probably go away. And the tragic thing is, this 80% number is not needed here. Tell people's stories, do good journalism, don't feel a need ("social science envy"?) to toss in a statistic that you spend much less time and effort researching than on the heart of your piece.

Ms. Herzog, please look back at what you wrote, read the Steensma article [ full text online,… ] and make a correction for your "80% of trans kids". That claim is quite far off what the science says.

(You could use the Steensma data if you write an article where you talk to children with gender dysphoria and their parents trying to figure things out. I'm not saying that's easy to predict -- from what I know it's common for a child to start by saying "I'm a boy, but I like a lot of girl things" and months later realize "no, I'm not a boy.")

    Please wait...

    Comments are closed.

    Commenting on this item is available only to members of the site. You can sign in here or create an account here.

    Add a comment

    By posting this comment, you are agreeing to our Terms of Use.