Die Genderdebatte

[zimtspinne]

Was zum Teufel ist denn ein Spiritus Rector? Müsste das hintere nicht klein geschrieben werden?

Ich überlegen noch, ob ich das als Diffamierung wahrnehmen sollte oder nicht 😌

[RPGNo1]

Was zum Teufel ist denn ein Spiritus Rector? Müsste das hintere nicht klein geschrieben werden?

Ich überlegen noch, ob ich das als Diffamierung wahrnehmen sollte oder nicht 😌

Ts ts ts. Keine lateinische Grundbildung, die jungen Leute. 

Ein Spiritus Rector ist eine Person, die als treibende Kraft, Ideengeber oder strategischer Kopf hinter einem Projekt, Unternehmen oder einer Idee steht.

[zimtspinne]

Da ich heute einen guten Tag und richtig gute Laune habe, ordne ich das mal nach Bauchgefühl als Nettigkeit ein 

edit/

hab doch mal Faktencheck gemacht und das killt mich jetzt

[Juliette]

Solang man nicht als Spriritus rectum bezeichnet wird... 

[zimtspinne]

Nochmal zu dem Interview. Hatte mir vorgenommen, auf eine Tätigkeit zu warten, wo ich nicht abgelenkt werde, hat nicht ganz geklappt.

Sagt sie irgendwo in der Mitte wirklich, es sind keine long-term schädlichen Effekte bekannt?

Bei ihrem engen Kontakt zur "Transcommunity" hat sie wohl Marci Bowers von WPATH verpasst, der sich sogar als Transaktivist und GAC-"Chirurg" ziemlich klar zu Fruchtbarkeit und Sexfunktion äußert.

[zimtspinne]

Wie auch immer, das Ende habe ich eben noch zu Ende gehört und dort plappert sie wieder voll drauflos in der kultigen Transsprache.
Die jungen Leute dürfen nicht hinterfragt werden.

Auch so ein Psycho-Trick der GAH-Gang wie Dr. Teetus Deletus, Kinder "junge Leute" zu nennen. Das klingt doch gleich so fast erwachsen und fit für Erwachsenenentscheidungen. 

Es wird bestimmt eine super Sache, bei Kindern Tanner Stage 2 die Ernsthaftigkeit ihrer Genderverwirrung zu bewerten, um ihnen rechtzeitig im Passing-Zeitfenster die Blocker zu verabreichen. Das kann nur gutgehen.

WArum sie Mädchen nicht ganz rausnimmt, da die schlicht nicht mal fürs "passing" profitieren (ich finds bei Jungs auch mehr als zweifelhaft - ein Eunuch ist keine Art von Frau sondern ein frühkastrierter Mann, das hört man und sieht man), bleibt auch offen. Ach, ich versau mir gerade die gute Laune damit, also Schluss für heute.

[eLender]

Viele Leute haben aufgrund von ihrer Rolle als Spiritus Rector des des nach ihr benannten Reports geschlussfolgert, dass sie vollständig gegen eine medikamentöse Behandlung von vorgeblich genderdysphoren/genderinkongruenten Kindern und Jugendlichen sei.

Sie hat dafür Evidenz gesucht und nicht gefunden. Warum ist das wohl so? Es ist ja nicht so, als gäbe es dazu keine Studien. Aber diese haben Mängel und erlauben keine Aussagen wie: "alles harmlos und im besten Falle hilfreich". Und auch hier gibt es Gründe, warum man aus solchen Studien keine wirklichen Empfehlungen aussprechen kann. Um das dennoch machen zu können, müsste man das machen, was man aus ethischen Gründen ablehnt. Angeblich gäbe es im Fall Tavistock Hunderte "Testkandidaten", die man quasi für ein langes Follow-up heranziehen könnte. Aber das will und kann man nicht machen, sie waren ja Teil eines Experimentes, von dem sie nichts wussten. Kann man hinterher schlecht anders darstellen.

(Ich wusste allerdings, was ein Spiritus Rector ist, was meiner vorzüglichen Schulbildung zuzuschreiben ist. Unser Schuldirektor war schon am frühen Nachmittag strack wie ein Zimmermann. Bildung, so wichtig heute )

Break (nuja, es geht eigentlich nahtlos weiter)

Pflichtlektüre! Jesse Singal hatten wir hier schon sehr früh auf dem Schirm, er beobachten den Irrsinn schon seit der frühen Steinzeit. Ich haue mal ein paar Punkte raus, aber man sollte das ganz lesen. Er spricht auch etwas an, was uns hier gerade beschäftigt.

After expressing concerns about the evidence base in 2024, on Feb. 3, the American Society of Plastic Surgeons became the first major American medical group to publicly question youth gender medicine since its widespread adoption. The organization published a nine-page "position statement" advising its members against any gender-related surgeries before age 19 and noting that "there are currently no validated methods" for determining whether youth gender dysphoria will resolve without medical treatment. (The document also acknowledged a similar level of uncertainty surrounding blockers and hormones, though that's less directly relevant to the practice of plastic surgeons.)
The next day, the American Medical Association — which has long approved of such procedures — announced that "in the absence of clear evidence, the A.M.A. agrees with A.S.P.S. that surgical interventions in minors should be generally deferred to adulthood."

https://archive.vn/WeeDG (New York Times: Medical Associations Trusted Belief Over Science on Youth Gender Care)

Ich könnte noch ergänzen: SBM. Aber da stinkt der Fisch vom Kopf, fürchte ich.

The science doesn't seem so settled after all, and it's important to understand what happened here. The approach of left-of-center Americans and our institutions — to assume that when a scientific organization releases a "policy statement" on a hot-button issue, that the policy statement must be accurate — is a deeply naïve understanding of science, human nature and politics, and how they intersect.
At a time when more and more Americans are turning away from expert authority in favor of YouTube quacks and their ilk — and when our own government is pushing scientifically baseless policies on childhood vaccination and climate change — it's vital that the organizations that represent mainstream science be open, honest and transparent about politically charged issues. If they aren't, there's simply no good reason to trust them.

The most striking finding of the Cass review, a 2024 British inquiry that found "remarkably weak" evidence to back up the practice of youth gender medicine, was the shoddy quality of the professional guidelines for this treatment.

Cass'Lektüre war und ist unheimlich wichtig, um die mangelhafte Evidenz aufzuzeigen. Sie verrät aber nicht, warum die Evidenz so mangelhaft ist. Und wer da dann nach mehr Studien ruft, um die Evidenz aufzuhübschen, der hat da prinzipiell was nicht verstanden (das machen die Homöopathen auch immer - irgendwann muss es doch klappen...).

I've been covering this controversy for about a decade from a left-of-center perspective, and I've found that anyone who questions these treatments, even mildly, is invariably accused of bigotry. It would be shocking if the professional organizations chiming in on these issues — which, like all such organizations, exist in part to increase the esteem of their members and to enhance their own influence — were immune from such influences. And now that the political winds have shifted radically, with the Trump administration launching an all-out assault on both the practice of and research into youth gender medicine, it seems some of them are realizing they would benefit from appearing a bit more moderate.

Es musste erst ein Wahnsinniger auftauchen, um den Wahnsinn zu stoppen. Das ist die Gegenwart, in der wir leben.

[RPGNo1]

Jesse Singal hatten wir hier schon sehr früh auf dem Schirm, er beobachten den Irrsinn schon seit der frühen Steinzeit. Ich haue mal ein paar Punkte raus, aber man sollte das ganz lesen.

Jesse Singal ist ein Guter. 

Jesse Singal's op-ed in the NYT: A turning point in "affirmative care"?

https://whyevolutionistrue.com/2026/02/25/jesse-singals-op-ed-in-the-nyt-a-turning-point-in-affirmative-care/

[Peiresc]

Es gibt nichts, was man nicht politisch nutzbar machen kann:

Transgender adults in Kansas have received letters ordering them to surrender their drivers licenses until they obtain a new one with a marker reflecting their sex assigned at birth.

Their current licenses are now invalid.

This also means trans people in Kansas currently cannot vote if their current license is their only form of ID.
https://x.com/cmclymer/status/2026903634508726390?s=20

[eLender]

Mal ein paar kluge Gedanken zu der Studie (dann muss ich nicht selber so viel denken).

Read some Piaget please!@prof_curiosity1

A Developmental Rebuttal to the "We Need the Trial" Defense of Puberty Blockers

Supporters of the Pathways trial argue that uncertainty about puberty blockers can only be resolved through high quality research. However, from a child development perspective, there are strong reasons to question whether experimentally interrupting puberty in children is ethically appropriate in the first place.

No one is disputing that some young people experience something that is labelled "gender distress". Rather, it questions whether medicalising a core developmental process during adolescence aligns with what we know about identity formation, neurocognitive maturity, and child protection.

1. Identity Formation Is Developmentally Fluid, Not Fixed
Developmental theory, particularly the work of Erik Erikson, characterizes adolescence as the stage of identity vs. role confusion. This stage is defined by:
- Exploration
- Instability
- Experimentation
- Social comparison
- Shifts in self concept

A reasonable concern is that puberty blockers may not simply "pause" development, they will reinforce and concretise an identity narrative at the very stage when identity is typically fluid. Adolescents frequently move through intense but temporary identity commitments  - whether political, subcultural, sexual, or ideological. Developmental psychology treats this as normal. Medical intervention, by contrast, can solidify and foreclose (Marcia) what might otherwise have evolved.

Supporters argue the trial allows research into whether blockers help. The counterpoint is that intervening at the peak of identity plasticity may itself distort the developmental process the research claims to study.

2. Cognitive Maturity and Long Term Risk Appraisal
According to Jean Piaget, adolescents enter the formal operational stage, gaining abstract reasoning. However, decades of developmental neuroscience show that:
- Executive function is still maturing
- Long term consequence evaluation is inconsistent
- Sensitivity to peer influence is heightened
- Future fertility and adult embodiment are cognitively abstract concepts

Which leads to the following considerations: Can a 10 or 14 year old meaningfully evaluate trade offs involving:
- Fertility pathways
 -Sexual development
- Bone health decades later
- Adult sexual functioning

Even if consent is technically obtained, developmental science suggests adolescents are unable to predict their adult selves. Consent is thus not real.

Supporters say parental consent and safeguards mitigate this. The counterargument is that child protection ethics exist precisely because children cannot fully internalise long term embodied consequences.

3. Puberty Is Not Just Hormonal, It Is Developmental Infrastructure
Puberty drives:
- Brain reorganization
- Sexual orientation consolidation
- Social reorientation toward peers
- Risk-taking calibration
- Emotional regulation shifts

Blocking puberty does not simply pause visible secondary sex characteristics. It alters the biological sequencing  that shapes adolescent brain development. Even if medication is discontinued, the impacts of the timing disruption itself may will not be neutral.

A further concern concern is that if puberty is the engine of adolescent integration, bodily, relational, and sexual, then experimentally interrupting it will introduce unknown developmental trade offs that no short term trial can fully measure.

4. The Vulnerability Profile of the Current Cohort
Current clinical populations presenting with "gender distress" show elevated rates of:
- Autism spectrum traits
- Anxiety and depression
- Trauma exposure
- Social isolation
- Same sex orientation

Evidence shows that adolescents under psychological strain often involves identity diffusion and distress driven commitments. A reasonable concern is whether puberty blockers are being offered to young people whose distress may be multi faceted -  social, psychological, neurodevelopmental - rather than primarily rooted in an immutable "gender identity".

The ethical tension is this. Are we studying a stable developmental phenomenon, or responding medically to a complex cluster of adolescent distress? If the latter, the risk of medicalising vulnerability increases.

5. The "We Need Research" Argument and the Precautionary Principle
Supporters argue that without a randomised controlled trial, uncertainty persists. That is correct on one level. However, child research ethics operate under a higher standard than adult research. When an intervention:
- Alters a core biological process
- Has unclear long-term reproductive effects
- Targets a protected population
the ethical default must be caution.

The principle of "first, do no harm" carries particular weight in pediatric contexts.

6. Reversibility: A Contested Claim
Supporters describe puberty blockers as reversible. Developmentally, this claim is contested. While hormonal suppression can be discontinued, we cannot fully reverse:
- Missed pubertal timing
- Altered peer integration patterns
- Delayed sexual maturation experiences
- Potential changes in sexual function pathways

Development is time sensitive. A 14 year old who does not undergo puberty alongside peers has a qualitatively different psychosocial experience than one who does. That difference may not be clinically measurable in short term trial endpoints, but it is developmentally significant.

Summary
Supporters argue:
- The trial is the responsible way to resolve uncertainty.
- High quality evidence protects future patients.
- Research is safer than off label practice without data.

An evidence based developmental response is:
- Adolescence is uniquely plastic and vulnerable.
- Puberty is foundational to identity consolidation.
- Cognitive maturity is incomplete.
- The long term embodied consequences remain uncertain.
- Vulnerable youth require care, not experimentation.

The core question then becomes: is experimental alteration of a key developmental process ethically justified in a highly vulnerable cohort; one defined by developmental immaturity and who are unable to properly consent to this treatment?

That is not a "transphobic" position. It is a child development question.

https://x.com/prof_curiosity1/status/2026919907422577119

Der Dreh- und Angelpunkt ist die "(Geschlechts-)Identität". Die Pillenverticker glauben ja, das sei angeboren und unveränderlich (dann wäre so eine Intervention noch halbwegs zu rechtfertigen). Widerspricht aber allem, was man so darüber weiß. Wie sonst käme es dazu, dass die "Dysphorie" meist wieder verschwindet. Das ist alles im Fluss, wer da mit Pillen anrückt, der will nur etwas verfestigen, was mehrheitlich von alleine verschwindet. Kann man gedanklich auch gerne mal auf andere Malaisen übertragen...

Achso: es gibt keine Methode, um festzustellen, ob die (präpubertäre) Dysphorie ein Leben lang anhält (und ob das überhaupt mit solchen Interventionen behandelt werden kann)

[eLender]

Angeblich gäbe es im Fall Tavistock Hunderte "Testkandidaten", die man quasi für ein langes Follow-up heranziehen könnte.

Hm, ich hatte hellseherische Fähigkeiten

The government has issued new legislation to enable a study that follows up 9,000 children and young people who previously received care for gender related distress on the NHS. The so-called "data linkage study", looking at the health outcomes of those who were seen at the now-closed Tavistock Gender Identity Development Service (Gids), was meant to be completed as part of the Cass Review. The four-year review of NHS children's gender services, led by Dr Hilary Cass, was unable to finish the study because of a lack of co-operation from adult gender clinics.
...

Speaking to the New Statesman in April 2024, Cass said the behaviour of the clinics was "mystifying" to her. "Particularly when you would expect that they would be curious about outcomes for the patient cohort going through, and if they are confident in the management approach, they would want to be able to demonstrate that."
...

"The study requires no active patient participation and instead relies on an analysis of information already held within health records and other nationally held databases," Streeting explained.

https://www.newstatesman.com/politics/uk-politics/2026/02/new-law-will-allow-for-study-to-see-what-happened-to-children-who-received-gender-care

Cass wollte diese Daten einsehen, aber es wurde ihr verweigert (man wollte wohl nicht, dass man sieht, was man da angerichtet hat). An sich schon ein Skandal, aber es gab wohl auch rechtliche Hürden (das müßte man genauer beleuchten). Das sind Daten, die vorliegen, und die man quasi anonym auswerten kann. Klar, das wird nur begrenzte Einblicke erlauben, aber man kann da schon ne Menge schlussfolgern (etwa, ob das langfristig zu noch mehr medizinischen Problemen führt - abgesehen von den psychischen).

Und natürlich muss man sich solche Daten ansehen, bevor man da weitere Menschenversuche macht. Das dürfte (hoffentlich) der Sargnagel für den Irrsinn (mit der neuen Studie) sein.

Dr Alice Hodkinson, the co-founder of Biology in Medicine, said: "The data linkage study should be undertaken before any consideration of a puberty blocker study in children."
She added: "There is already a wealth of information available to be reviewed, and it would be crucial to know whether these young people are content, if they have a stable family environment and if they are successfully in education or work, when compared with their peers.
"We hope that this study will in addition inform us of the outcomes of adult transition. Young adults are also at risk of going through life altering cross sex interventions that they may come to regret. Recent figures in the Levy report show that it is overwhelmingly the 17 to 19 age group who are referred to the adult gender clinics, which raises the concern that this is not a persisting identity.
"It important to consider what these patients are seeking, whether cross sex interventions really are the answer, and whether instead more holistic integrated non-hormonal support could prevent long term harms."

https://archive.ph/fUHIL (The Times: Clinics forced to share data of children who took puberty blockers)

[eLender]

Habe noch ein kurzes Transskript des Interviews mit Cass gefunden (gekürzt). Da kommt sie nochmal auf die Studie und die PBs.

Bernard Lane@Bernard_Lane

"It's blatant discrimination to deny trans kids puberty blockers. The exact same drugs have been given to kids with precocious puberty for years. Completely safe."

This trans activist talking point is endlessly recycled, in various forms. Paediatrician Hilary Cass, who ran the UK review of gender dysphoria treatment, came up against a variant of this line last weekend during an interview with RNZ in New Zealand.

Interviewer: "Are [blockers] safe medications for young people to be taking? Perhaps not even just in a [gender] transition situation, but also for precocious puberty?"

This time, the suggestion is that if blockers are unsafe for trans-identifying kids, they must be unsafe for precocious puberty. But, as usual, an anti-trans double standard is implied.

Cass: "We've got years and years of experience of [blockers] being used for precocious puberty, and we know they're very safe for that, and they are licensed for that. That's quite different when we're giving them to young people who are going into [normally timed] puberty."

"When you have precocious puberty [younger than 8 for girls, under 9 for boys], essentially you've got some abnormal hormone environment, your hormones are spiking too early, and so what the puberty blocks are doing is normalising that."

"Whereas, when we're giving them to [trans-identifying] adolescents ... there's a normal spike in hormones [at the outset of puberty], and we're flattening it [with blockers]. So, it's actually almost the reverse. And we know less about the long-term impacts of that [trans puberty suppression]."

"One of the really shocking things ... is we just don't have the follow up of what happens to these young [trans-ID] people into adulthood, so we we don't know the full safety data, and that's exactly why we're looking at the [clinical] trial [of blockers]."

Puberty blockers are not safety tested or licensed for use with the psychological condition of gender dysphoria. These powerful drugs are used "off label" by gender clinics. The drugs are licensed for physiological conditions such as precocious puberty and prostate cancer.

The RNZ interview, in which Cass rebuts other activist misinformation, is here https://rnz.co.nz/national/progr
ammes/saturday/audio/2019023992/dr-hilary-cass-puberty-blockers


The difference between suppression of premature puberty and normally timed puberty was relevant to the intervention earlier this month by the UK Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA) to pause the clinical trial of blockers on safety and ethical grounds.

One of the changes proposed by the MHRA was for more vigilance on potential physiological harm to the children in the trial. Up to 250 kids were to join the study and the key outcome measure chosen by the researchers was a subjective "quality of life" survey.

These children were to be included in the trial from the onset of a normally timed puberty, known as Tanner Stage 2, around age 10.

The MHRA said it recognised blockers were "already being used in precocious puberty. However, unlike patients with precocious puberty, the proposed cohort in this trial have normal biological hormonal and sexual development but a psychological condition of gender dysphoria."

"This of itself would not preclude an off-label use within the confines of a trial. However, the MHRA would like to explore the inclusion of much more detailed physiological safety assessment for this biologically healthy cohort."

The MHRA noted that the key outcome measure was the KIDSCREEN10 quality of life questionnaire. "However, in this situation, the physiological and adverse pharmacological impacts may long outlast and outweigh any detected differences [in quality of life]."

The MHRA then listed the potential adverse impacts, including permanent bone damage, infertility and harm to the developing adolescent brain.

A key reason for these concerns is the fact that, unlike children with precocious puberty, trans-ID kids typically go from early blockers to cross-sex hormones meant to be taken lifelong. This combination is expected to sterilise them and may cause other health problems.

It's important to remember that trans-ID females are given synthetic testosterone drugs at levels far higher than a female body is designed for, and the same goes for trans-ID males given oestrogen.

The MHRA letter on the trial is here https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/6998b06d
047739fe61889efb/Sponsor-letter110226.pdf

https://x.com/Bernard_Lane/status/2027579815105335508