you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]denverkris 10 insightful - 1 fun10 insightful - 0 fun11 insightful - 1 fun -  (13 children)

I don't think these teens have an accurate idea of what a traumatic major surgery a mastectomy actually is. All they see are stupid instagram or tumblr pics of trans "boys" with "man chests" and are all like "Ya I want that!". It's ludicrous that anyone would allow a minor to voluntarily get such an unnecessary and traumatic surgery. I think some of them also labor under the mistaken idea that if they "change their mind" they just get an augmentation down the road. It ain't that easy folks. And, this girl is never going to be a "real boy". She'd be best off accepting that fact.

[–]MarkTwainiac 10 insightful - 1 fun10 insightful - 0 fun11 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

I don't think these teens have an accurate idea of what a traumatic major surgery a mastectomy actually is.

Yes, you're right. Also, they have no idea how common "complications" are in these cosmetic double mastectomies. The complications I hear that happen quite often to these girls and young women include nerve damage that causes chronic or permanent numbness, discomfort and/or pain; muscle damage that leads to limited range of movement in the arms and shoulders; misplacement or total loss of the nipples; keloid scars; damage to lymph nodes and drainage; failure to remove all the breast tissue so that the chest is left looking weirdly lumpy, misshapen and unbalanced; post-op infections...

I often wonder if this willingness to jump into having such traumatic major surgery isn't just due to belief in gender ideology, misplaced trust in the medical establishment and the usual feelings of physical invincibility and exceptionalism - "won't happen to me" - that often come with being of young age.

I have a sense it's also coz most of these young people grew up never experiencing or witnessing firsthand serious physical illness and suffering themselves due to being of generations born at a time when the once-routine or commonplace illnesses that everyone used to get or see during childhood - measles, polio, rubella, mumps, chicken pox, pneumonia, staph, streptococcus (scarlet fever) and other such bacterial infections, etc - have been eliminated due to vaccinations and modern-day antibiotics.

When I was growing up in the USA in the 1950s and 60s, most kids personally experienced bouts of serious sickness that would cause us to be in bed or confined for long stretches - and a fair number of polio victims were still living in iron lungs. Back then, most cancers and forms of heart disease were almost invariably lethal too. Also, back then everyone was well aware of medical scandals like Thalidomide and lobotomies, and everyone was well acquainted with the horrible fates that commonly befell girls and women who had pregnancies outside of marriage, had unwanted pregnancies when married, and who had illegal abortions.

Things gradually got better over the course of the 60s and 70s due to vaccinations, antibiotics, advances in cancer and cardiovascular care, birth control and finally the legalization of abortion. Still, in the 1970s scandals around DES and IUDs occurred, then in the 1980s AIDS came along.... The result was that even after birth control and legal abortion became available, most young females still felt a frisson of vulnerablilty that kept us from believing we were physically invincible the way young males did. When AIDS came along, it really shook many young men out of the sense of complacency, safety and invincibility they'd become accustomed to as well.

By contrast, nowadays, most kids of both sexes in the well-off parts of the world breeze through childhood without ever getting seriously sick, and if they get sick it's for a short while coz of modern-day drugs. HIV, which was once a sure death sentence, is now seen as a manageable disease, and even most cancers and various other diseases are no longer fatal the way they once were.

All this is progress, to be sure. But a downside is that many young people seem to have no idea of how precious and fragile their own health is, and how easily one's good health can be compromised - or lost - due to illness or a traumatic major surgery. Even when major surgery goes entirely as planned it - and the anesthesia used - can have longterm negative effects. And as we all know from shows like "Botched" and the stats on the hundreds of thousands who die due to medical errors in the US each year, very often surgeries and other medical interventions go terribly wrong.

[–]denverkris 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

I think its a lot of what you mention, plus a lot of other things, with a major one being that they have way too much time on their hands. On top of that I think they do fewer chores and work fewer jobs than kids of previous generation, so they have plenty of time to obsess over this identity nonsense.

"that many young people seem to have no idea of how precious and fragile their own health is"

This. Theres no take backs with this stuff. No "oops I changed my mind". And they're chasing a mark they'll never hit. Such a waste.

[–]MarkTwainiac 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

Yes, I agree many diverse factors are involved, not just the ones I mentioned in my post.

So true about today's kids doing fewer household chores and working fewer formal jobs outside the home than previous generations. Used to be, outside of school kids too young to work legally still delivered newspapers, shoveled snow, swept streets, mowed lawns, washed windows, cleaned houses, washed cars, polished silver, did laundry and ironing, worked as "candy stripers," etc - and once we became old enough to work officially for real wages in after-school and weekend jobs (age 16), we all had them.

Also, perhaps coz of smaller families, fewer kids nowadays seem to spend time caring for younger siblings as kids were back in the day. And fewer seem to be doing informal jobs like babysitting, homework monitoring, tutoring etc - tasks that when I was growing up girls routinely did from age 11-12.

What's more, tons of time outside of school was taken up by things like religious education, civic activities (scouting, for example) and various sports and recreational activities, whether through schools, community organizations and clubs or more informally.

[–]denverkris 6 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 0 fun7 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

Indeed. One other thing I though of, I feel as though we were constantly being reminded that other people's opinions of us were not important, and that we needed to think for ourselves (if all your friends jumped off a cliff....yada yada). But social media is teaching these kids just the opposite. They're being trained to collect "likes", to constantly present their "image", and that they actually have some sort of "right" to impose their beliefs on others...to actually compel others (including complete strangers) give a feck about their "internal feelings". The way others see them is SO important to them that they fall to pieces if others see reality instead of whatever internal fantasy these kids have come up with. Not a recipe for a very happy life, imo.

[–]MarkTwainiac 7 insightful - 1 fun7 insightful - 0 fun8 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Yes, we were taught think for ourselves, not to be afraid of going against the crowd, to be "inner directed" not "outer directed," that "life isn't a popularity contest," "sticks and stones will break my bones but words will never hurt/break me" and - very important - "don't sweat the small stuff," "don't let others bring you down" and after a failure, defeat, gaffe, mistake or (perceived) social humiliation, "dust yourself off, hold your head high, get back on the horse and carry on."

[–]worried19 7 insightful - 1 fun7 insightful - 0 fun8 insightful - 1 fun -  (7 children)

The worst thing is that doctors are performing double mastectomies on children as young as 13 in the USA. I feel like that fact needs to be spread far and wide because so many people aren't aware it's happening. Even many trans activists will deny it, despite the fact that the doctors involved freely admit it is being done.

[–]denverkris 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Yes, its insane.

[–]yousaythosethings 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (5 children)

Where are they happening at 13? And I assume with parental consent at that age?

[–]worried19 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

California for sure, but I assume all over the country. Parents can easily travel to a different state to find a doctor willing to do it.

Olson had 68 surgically diminished girls fill out her “novel” scale between one and five years after their surgery. Thirty-three of these girls were under 18 at the time of surgery. Two were only 13 years old, and five were only 14.

https://thefederalist.com/2018/09/12/u-s-doctors-performing-double-mastectomies-healthy-13-year-old-girls

Odeneal: How many patients have you referred for the chest surgery?

Olson-Kennedy: Probably about 200.

https://www.nationalreview.com/magazine/2019/12/09/the-tragedy-of-the-trans-child

I don't believe these surgeries can proceed without the consent of the parents, but if Olson-Kennedy had her way, they would. She advocates for children being removed from parents who are not on board with medical transition.

[–]yousaythosethings 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

Thank you! I was only aware of Oregon before which allows double mastectomies without parental consent as young as 15.

Even just 7 occurring at 13-14 is bone-chilling. It should be none. Those are 7 tragedies. I wonder how old those girls are now. It may be years before they are in a position to ponder the consequences.

[–]worried19 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

I had not heard that about Oregon. Snopes gives some conflicting information:

https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/oregon-teen-sex-change-law

Are there verified cases of surgeries being carried out on kids that young in Oregon without parental consent?

[–]yousaythosethings 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

This Snopes article is misleading and makes me mad as well. I don't see how it debunks or casts doubt on the core claims at all. In fact, it affirms them by confirming that changes were made to the law in Oregon and that the effect of those changes is to legally permit elective double mastectomies on 15-year-old girls. Oh, but wait, Snopes is here to tell us, "Don't worry, because what kind of doctor would actually perform that kind of procedure on a young girl? Surely doctors will be reasonable." Those are the noises of someone who has no idea wtf they're talking about on issues stemming from gender ideology or is being deceitful while knowing better. We have already learned that good faith is not a standard we can rely on when it comes to those who profit from gender ideology.

I say this as a lawyer (not your lawyer) all the time but I hate how reporting on legal situations and changes is handled by the media when it's directed at the general public. It often preys upon widespread public ignorance about our legal system and the way changes are made to the law in the first place in order to manipulate public perception. In the U.S. we have a common law system involving an interplay of statutes passed by legislative bodies, agency regulations, agency opinions, guidance published by agencies, case law developed through judicial opinion, executive orders, procedural rules, etc. with layers of federal, state, and local laws. That's why when someone asks "Can I legally do X?" it's not a simple inquiry of "Let me pull up the law for a sec and let you know." The legal parameters for almost anything rely on a constellation of legal authorities as specified above that first require you to identify the universe of legal provisions at issue. You can’t answer a legal question with any reasonable degree of certainty without doing so.

Snopes's point seems to be that because the pre-existing age of medical consent in Oregon is in 15 and that that is the age of consent that applies to the new law in question, that it’s a nothingburger. The reporting that I read before, which was not from Fox News, made this clear. As if the think thanks and special interest organizations who drafted and lobbied for these specific legal changes didn't have a team of lawyers behind them analyzing the existing legal framework and implications of proposed changes. There is no way they didn't at any point identify and consider the age of the people to whom their proposed changes would apply. That means they knew it would allow 15-year-olds to get double mastectomies/sex change surgery without parental consent. That means they deliberately didn’t add a higher age of consent into this new law because they knew that the gap-filling age of consent for medical procedures would apply as a default. And if they had any issue with this result they would have pushed for an update to the law. So yea, here the legislators and lobbyists knew exactly what they were doing, and it’s shady af.

By the way, I’ve never looked into who publishes Snopes articles, but this is Kim LaCapria, the content manager for Snopes and author of this particular article. And if there’s any doubt about what her bias is here, she puts her pronouns in her Twitter profile, and if you Google her, you can also find her giving a lot of commentary in various publications about anti-trans hoaxes. There’s also a lot of weird information about her out there. I can’t look at Snopes the same way again.

[–]worried19 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Good to know. It would probably be too much to hope that Snopes is impartial. I don't trust most mainstream media these days.

Even the author of this article seems to realize that it would be insane for doctors to perform that surgery on a minor without parental consent, but doctors are insane these days. Surgeons don't abide by medical ethics. All they care about is getting paid. Even if some doctors do care, you can always find one who doesn't. My question was more if any kid under 18 had managed to get surgery in Oregon without parental consent because that would be a big boost of visibility to the insanity that's happening to children. We all know it's happening to kids with parental consent, but without it, that would be a bigger news story.

If it was my kid, I'd hightail it to another state. The government can't take kids away from parents for not medicalizing them, at least not yet, much to the displeasure of some trans activists.