I researched the claims to authority made in a poorly written submission to an enquiry on UK law for self-id by a TRA. I discovered that this person was an adviser to the UK Government and they quoted a report for which they had been special adviser. They quoted WPATH and the World Health Organisation, and European and UK law. It turned out that person, an academic in an UK university, had been the President of WPATH, had worked as an advisor to the EU on trans rights, and had brought the cases to court which resulted in changes to the law that they quote. I also discovered that the committee that advised the WHO were made up of members of WPATH.
WPATH's influence extends beyond healthcare and into law and policy-making.
I did write a piece for another blog on substack. If you do a google search on my sub-stack handle it will come up. Just a warning: I do not run the blog and its focus has since changed from gender to the conflict in the middle east, some of the opinions expressed in some articles that have been published I found to be upsetting.
I also wrote a piece about telehealth companies in the US and their use of marketing tactics to target gay and lesbian people. At the time they were promoting the concept of 'microdosing' hormones as if they were psychedelic drugs, and had borrowed the visual language of rave culture: they have dialled this down a bit in subsequent rebrands.
I really appreciated the history of WPath and you have motivated me to read Mia's report, which I now realise does contain things I did not know.
I am particularly interested in the comparison between gender treatments and aesthetic surgeries / treatments. The argument that this is "necessary" medical care because the trans identity means that the original body has a "birth defect". Mia if you are reading this, there are two things I really think someone needs to explore. And I have one observation.
1. This correction of a "birth defect". I know this is the official line in gender affirmative circles, but on reflection it is not persuasive. We don't correct all birth defects. Surgeries such as cleft palate are done routinely because they have been shown to be safe and effective, not just because a cleft palate is abnormal. We also no longer routinely correct abnormal genitalia in babies. I am curious as to the history here, because I believe that it used to be routine to "fix" abnormal genitalia but somewhere in the 70s or 80s the attitude changed to one that recognised that intersex babies should usually be left alone. How did this development happen and then we suddenly go backward and think that genital birth defects always need correction, with no need for evidence at the correction is beneficial? Were the gender surgeons of the 90s the ones who used to "correct" babies, seeking new patients where they could exercise their skills? Just so many questions here.
2. With respect to aesthetic surgeries, I observed that no one would allow a child to have a boob job, but I was shocked to find out that these are being allowed in some cases for minors with parental consent. I am not sure how common this is and what age these girls are. Hard to find the data. I really am wondering whether the whole trans surgery phenomenon is an expression of a wider problem, which is the commercialisation of medical care (as Leor Sapir has discussed), and the pressure to loosen up the definition of capacity in order to create more customers. Except in this case, arguing that the care is necessary allows doctors to argue that even patients who lack capacity "deserve" to have "care" (or else it is "discrimination").
3. I do know of transitioned people who seem happy with at least some of the surgeries they have had. For example, Aaron Terrel, who is very critical of the gender industry, is nevertheless very glad that he had top surgery. Debbie Hayton is similarly happier now after transitioning. So it seems wrong to assume that all of these treatments are at all times the same as having a healthy leg removed. The problem is that at the moment, because of the misinformation and the belief in essential "gender identity" or true trans, I don't think that informed consent is possible. Not really sure how to resolve all of that.
This is about identity. When a society places identity over everything, there is a certain logic to it. What people don't realize is that this is very recent. There was a massive study of Americans in the 70s that caught the change in attitudes. One of the points made in the write up is that after about '76 what you do, as a doctor, a teacher, etc. begins to take a back seat to self expression. So people become doctors AND artists, or teachers AND musicians. Nothing wrong with making art, the point is more that these socially necessary, and connected things that people do and which have always been a profound source of meaning, are suddenly in the mid 70s not enough.
Those identity based values have come on a long way since then. They imbue our childrearing, our schooling and every aspect of culture to the point where they are just common sense. That's why the WPATH people seem so normal. It's because this way of thinking is the water we swim in.
I think that's part of the reason why it can feel like you're losing your mind when you start to look critically at all of this. We still have these basic human intuitions that tell us that removing someone's legs or implanting giant breasts is monstrous, but apart from the very traditional, which has itself been hollowed out, there's no universally shared notion of what is good for human beings that we can push back with.
There needs to be a more positive way to find meaning in life than by modifying your body in extreme ways or inverting social norms. Apart from the physical and mental toll they take, they are in the end, sad. They express the lowest of low expectations. It's not even changing your own body (through something like bodybuilding). It's handing over your body to the professionals to be their canvas.
I think the Laura Edward Leper's quote is the perfect quote for understanding the absolute core of this issue: They truly, 200% believe that these treatments are the ONLY option when a child/teen/adult declares a trans identity. They believe it MUST be done in the same way chemotherapy/surgery/radiation must be done for cancer and they are heroes for tackling the problems and dose effects that come with these interventions in the exact same way doctors are heroes for trying to help people try to manage the side effects and negative outcomes of a cancer treatment. I think they genuinely, honestly, sincerely, even compassionately believe these gender "treatments" are just as medically necessary and I don't know how you move beyond that. And I know every time I comment something like this people will come at me for allowing these people to have any humanity or compassion in their motives. This would be much easier to deal with if they truly were evil. It's much harder to deal with when people genuinely believe from a place of kindness and good intentions that they are saving lives and helping people.
When I went into my trans life over 30 years ago I had never heard the term "non-binary". There was "intersex" however I believed most who identified as interexed did not want anything to do with the trans lobby. Creating bodies that don't exist in nature is definitely a major ethical issue. I did hear of a doctor in the UK who amputated someone's limb but unable to substantiate the story. Also noted the surgical alteration of genitalia requires repositioning the urethra. The surgeons better know what they are doing and the patient better be prepared!
Also I want to add I think there is some sort of connection to the current mental health crisis and the expansion of disability accommodations for mental health issues that happened in 2008 and following that the ACA allowing insurance coverage to young people until age 26 on parents insurance.
When we look at all this and what was happening in the internet and the rise in image sharing and infographics which really brought psychological language into common parlance I think it created incentives, gave a rise in access to those most likely to seek these incentives and also created the language needed to bring all this together.
anyways these are just some things I’ve been trying to tie together.
The extreme mods have been happening underground for a long time. I am really curious to see if people from that space are now involved and influencing trans health care and if so can those ties be brought to light to highlight the ethical issues we see in gender health care.
I was deeply involved in the body mod scene back in the late 90s and mid 2000s. I have seen people cut off limbs, digits, nipples, castration etc..
I have tried to see if I can find links with who’s working behind the scenes but it’s hard since it’s behind the scenes.
I’ll also say that a disproportionate number of the people I knew then who now have teens, have teens who are trans identifying.
There are limits to cosmetic surgery usually. If someone has body dysmorphic disorder, one is not supposed to do surgery. Either the body dysmorphia moves elsewhere or the person continues to have their mental health deteriorate....maybe this sounds familiar...
Hello. I really appreciate the podcast and have been a listener since the beginning.
I recently subscribed so I can listen to the bonus content.
However, I'm distressed that I do not seem able to access the subscriber-only episodes except as video. That means I can't listen while running!
Do you have audio-only files of all the episodes?
If not, may I suggest doing what Sam Harris does and creating a separate, subscriber-only app, with login, so that subscribers can access audio-only files?
If you are in a browser, look at the right-hand side of the screen near the top and you will see a button that says "email mobile setup link". If you do that, you will get instructions for whatever podcast app you use on your phone. You can also just listen as audio on that page, on your phone. On that page there is also a link where you can copy the RSS feed, which can be pasted into any podcast app. You can also email hello@widerlenspod.com and ask them for help if you can't find the button.
I researched the claims to authority made in a poorly written submission to an enquiry on UK law for self-id by a TRA. I discovered that this person was an adviser to the UK Government and they quoted a report for which they had been special adviser. They quoted WPATH and the World Health Organisation, and European and UK law. It turned out that person, an academic in an UK university, had been the President of WPATH, had worked as an advisor to the EU on trans rights, and had brought the cases to court which resulted in changes to the law that they quote. I also discovered that the committee that advised the WHO were made up of members of WPATH.
WPATH's influence extends beyond healthcare and into law and policy-making.
This is amazing. You should write about this.
I did write a piece for another blog on substack. If you do a google search on my sub-stack handle it will come up. Just a warning: I do not run the blog and its focus has since changed from gender to the conflict in the middle east, some of the opinions expressed in some articles that have been published I found to be upsetting.
I also wrote a piece about telehealth companies in the US and their use of marketing tactics to target gay and lesbian people. At the time they were promoting the concept of 'microdosing' hormones as if they were psychedelic drugs, and had borrowed the visual language of rave culture: they have dialled this down a bit in subsequent rebrands.
I really appreciated the history of WPath and you have motivated me to read Mia's report, which I now realise does contain things I did not know.
I am particularly interested in the comparison between gender treatments and aesthetic surgeries / treatments. The argument that this is "necessary" medical care because the trans identity means that the original body has a "birth defect". Mia if you are reading this, there are two things I really think someone needs to explore. And I have one observation.
1. This correction of a "birth defect". I know this is the official line in gender affirmative circles, but on reflection it is not persuasive. We don't correct all birth defects. Surgeries such as cleft palate are done routinely because they have been shown to be safe and effective, not just because a cleft palate is abnormal. We also no longer routinely correct abnormal genitalia in babies. I am curious as to the history here, because I believe that it used to be routine to "fix" abnormal genitalia but somewhere in the 70s or 80s the attitude changed to one that recognised that intersex babies should usually be left alone. How did this development happen and then we suddenly go backward and think that genital birth defects always need correction, with no need for evidence at the correction is beneficial? Were the gender surgeons of the 90s the ones who used to "correct" babies, seeking new patients where they could exercise their skills? Just so many questions here.
2. With respect to aesthetic surgeries, I observed that no one would allow a child to have a boob job, but I was shocked to find out that these are being allowed in some cases for minors with parental consent. I am not sure how common this is and what age these girls are. Hard to find the data. I really am wondering whether the whole trans surgery phenomenon is an expression of a wider problem, which is the commercialisation of medical care (as Leor Sapir has discussed), and the pressure to loosen up the definition of capacity in order to create more customers. Except in this case, arguing that the care is necessary allows doctors to argue that even patients who lack capacity "deserve" to have "care" (or else it is "discrimination").
3. I do know of transitioned people who seem happy with at least some of the surgeries they have had. For example, Aaron Terrel, who is very critical of the gender industry, is nevertheless very glad that he had top surgery. Debbie Hayton is similarly happier now after transitioning. So it seems wrong to assume that all of these treatments are at all times the same as having a healthy leg removed. The problem is that at the moment, because of the misinformation and the belief in essential "gender identity" or true trans, I don't think that informed consent is possible. Not really sure how to resolve all of that.
This is about identity. When a society places identity over everything, there is a certain logic to it. What people don't realize is that this is very recent. There was a massive study of Americans in the 70s that caught the change in attitudes. One of the points made in the write up is that after about '76 what you do, as a doctor, a teacher, etc. begins to take a back seat to self expression. So people become doctors AND artists, or teachers AND musicians. Nothing wrong with making art, the point is more that these socially necessary, and connected things that people do and which have always been a profound source of meaning, are suddenly in the mid 70s not enough.
Those identity based values have come on a long way since then. They imbue our childrearing, our schooling and every aspect of culture to the point where they are just common sense. That's why the WPATH people seem so normal. It's because this way of thinking is the water we swim in.
I think that's part of the reason why it can feel like you're losing your mind when you start to look critically at all of this. We still have these basic human intuitions that tell us that removing someone's legs or implanting giant breasts is monstrous, but apart from the very traditional, which has itself been hollowed out, there's no universally shared notion of what is good for human beings that we can push back with.
There needs to be a more positive way to find meaning in life than by modifying your body in extreme ways or inverting social norms. Apart from the physical and mental toll they take, they are in the end, sad. They express the lowest of low expectations. It's not even changing your own body (through something like bodybuilding). It's handing over your body to the professionals to be their canvas.
I think the Laura Edward Leper's quote is the perfect quote for understanding the absolute core of this issue: They truly, 200% believe that these treatments are the ONLY option when a child/teen/adult declares a trans identity. They believe it MUST be done in the same way chemotherapy/surgery/radiation must be done for cancer and they are heroes for tackling the problems and dose effects that come with these interventions in the exact same way doctors are heroes for trying to help people try to manage the side effects and negative outcomes of a cancer treatment. I think they genuinely, honestly, sincerely, even compassionately believe these gender "treatments" are just as medically necessary and I don't know how you move beyond that. And I know every time I comment something like this people will come at me for allowing these people to have any humanity or compassion in their motives. This would be much easier to deal with if they truly were evil. It's much harder to deal with when people genuinely believe from a place of kindness and good intentions that they are saving lives and helping people.
When I went into my trans life over 30 years ago I had never heard the term "non-binary". There was "intersex" however I believed most who identified as interexed did not want anything to do with the trans lobby. Creating bodies that don't exist in nature is definitely a major ethical issue. I did hear of a doctor in the UK who amputated someone's limb but unable to substantiate the story. Also noted the surgical alteration of genitalia requires repositioning the urethra. The surgeons better know what they are doing and the patient better be prepared!
Also I want to add I think there is some sort of connection to the current mental health crisis and the expansion of disability accommodations for mental health issues that happened in 2008 and following that the ACA allowing insurance coverage to young people until age 26 on parents insurance.
When we look at all this and what was happening in the internet and the rise in image sharing and infographics which really brought psychological language into common parlance I think it created incentives, gave a rise in access to those most likely to seek these incentives and also created the language needed to bring all this together.
anyways these are just some things I’ve been trying to tie together.
This episode was great!
The extreme mods have been happening underground for a long time. I am really curious to see if people from that space are now involved and influencing trans health care and if so can those ties be brought to light to highlight the ethical issues we see in gender health care.
I was deeply involved in the body mod scene back in the late 90s and mid 2000s. I have seen people cut off limbs, digits, nipples, castration etc..
I have tried to see if I can find links with who’s working behind the scenes but it’s hard since it’s behind the scenes.
I’ll also say that a disproportionate number of the people I knew then who now have teens, have teens who are trans identifying.
There are limits to cosmetic surgery usually. If someone has body dysmorphic disorder, one is not supposed to do surgery. Either the body dysmorphia moves elsewhere or the person continues to have their mental health deteriorate....maybe this sounds familiar...
Hello. I really appreciate the podcast and have been a listener since the beginning.
I recently subscribed so I can listen to the bonus content.
However, I'm distressed that I do not seem able to access the subscriber-only episodes except as video. That means I can't listen while running!
Do you have audio-only files of all the episodes?
If not, may I suggest doing what Sam Harris does and creating a separate, subscriber-only app, with login, so that subscribers can access audio-only files?
Thank you.
Please let us know if you've solved this using the other comments, or if you require further assistance. thanks!
Hi. It's a bit confusing because if you click on the link from your substack feed, you don't see the instructions. Try this link: https://www.widerlenspod.com/p/premium-how-has-wpath-responded-to.
If you are in a browser, look at the right-hand side of the screen near the top and you will see a button that says "email mobile setup link". If you do that, you will get instructions for whatever podcast app you use on your phone. You can also just listen as audio on that page, on your phone. On that page there is also a link where you can copy the RSS feed, which can be pasted into any podcast app. You can also email hello@widerlenspod.com and ask them for help if you can't find the button.
There is a way to feed the premium audio files to whichever podcast app you use. I think the directions are in the bottom of the email but also can be found here... https://support.substack.com/hc/en-us/articles/4519588148244-How-do-I-listen-to-episodes-on-my-podcast-app