According to Dr. Michael Brown: We Were Here When Medical Science Lost Its Mind. It is my considered opinion that Michael Brown lost his mind decades ago. Moreover, his personality disorder has been progressing. Brown possesses no expertise in regards to medical science.
According to Brown:
One day, when sanity returns to the world, we will be able to tell a future generation, “We were here when science lost touch with reality. We were here when the medical profession lost its mind. We were here when feelings displaced biology.”
I won’t bore you with the details. From the above, Michael Brown goes into lobotomy imagery and other medical mistakes. Brown’s intent is to convince people that, in the future, gender-affirming care will be considered harmful. Aside from not being a scientific expert, I am pretty sure that Brown is not a fortune teller.
Today, however, we have taken things even further. Not only are we giving perfectly healthy 18-year-old girls full mastectomies, not only are we putting pre-pubescent children on potentially dangerous hormone blockers, based entirely on how they feel about themselves, but we are also trashing biological realities in the name of ideology.
Perception now trumps biological sex. Feelings trump science.
An 18-year-old trans boy might very well want a mastectomy as an alternative to chest binding. He is an adult and he can consent to cosmetic surgery. His reasoning would be a great deal more logical, in my opinion, than an 18 year old woman filling her tits with silicone.
“Does anyone really believe that Michael Brown gives a flying fuck about gender-diverse children, adolescents and young adults?”
The wellbeing of transgender adults — their quality of life — is often a function of how well their presentation coincides with their gender. In some cases (far too many) that measure also correlates to self-harm. The surgery has implications well beyond the simple cosmetics.
That brings me to “potentially dangerous hormone blockers” bullshit. The science regarding puberty blockers (GnRHa) is settled. The medication is safe, effective and fully reversible.
Furthermore, in the interest of accuracy, prepubescent kids do not receive puberty blockers as Brown contends. The treatment begins at Tanner Stage 2 which occurs after entering puberty.
The “entirely how they feel” crap is also misleading. Gender is not akin to “I feel blue today.” It is at the core of who we are. Moreover, gender has a durable biological basis so it’s more than Brown’s dismissive “feelings.”
Brown’s mendacity continues from there with the meme of “trashing biological realities in the name of ideology.” Michael Brown is actually “trashing” gender-affirming care in the name of ideology. Gender is an objective reality; not an “ideology.”
Then it’s back to “perception” and “feelings.” I’ll not repeat myself.
As an aside (and I hate to be like Trump talking about himself), I have acute PTSD. It is the result of having been ambushed and shot. I suffer from intense anxiety and depression and I have one suicide attempt. I also have pervasive insomnia as well. Moreover, my condition gets worse by the year.
Furthermore, I cannot go into a grocery store without noise-cancelling headphones. That is based on my “perception” of potential harm.
Based upon my “feelings” and “perceptions” I take a shit load of meds. I am not comparing myself to transgender people. Not at all. Unless I act out (which I do at times) no one knows that I have PTSD. Trans persons often display their medical condition.
But something more pernicious is at work here. Does anyone really believe that Michael Brown gives a flying fuck about gender-diverse children, adolescents and young adults?
Michael Brown’s concern is religion. The existence of transgender persons supposedly creates a conflict with scripture. Brown’s response to this problem is to try to eliminate trans folks.
“There we go again with the dismissive ‘how you feel about yourself.'”
As long as he brought it up, let us compare gender affirming care to lobotomies. For starters lobotomies began being performed in the early 1940s. 80 years later it is a certainty that medical science is far more advanced.
However, the biggest difference between lobotomies and gender-affirming care is staging.
A lobotomy is one and done. It is irreversible.
On the other hand, a prepubescent child receives counseling and, to get relief from his or her symptoms, they might transition via hairstyle and attire. If they desist it is simply a matter of changing appearance.
In adolescence, a youth might receive puberty blockers. At the risk of repeating myself, that, too, is a fully reversible treatment.
In later teens, the youth might be a candidate for cross-sex hormones. Those treatments might have irreversible side effects. However, he or she is likely to have transitioned years before. His or her gender identity is no longer in doubt. Nor is the intensity of the distress caused by gender dysphoria.
Let’s give adolescents, their parents and their doctors some due credit. The clinicians who specialize in this care are highly trained and experienced. The youths and their parents can be counted upon to utilize well-informed judgment.
Michael Brown offers yet another feeble argument:
As WebMD tweeted on July 30, “Sex should be removed as a legal designation on the public part of birth certificates, the American Medical Association (AMA) said Monday.”
That is true. The article is here. My reaction is “so what?”
Brown attempts to answer that question:
In other words, when it comes to biological realities, we should kiss them goodbye—that is, if those realities contradict how you feel about yourself.
In fact, we should just kiss those realities goodbye in general, since, after all, the whole gender binary is oppressive.
“Rather than concern for the best interests of a deity, changes, if any, will be in the best interests of real, living people.”
There we go again with the dismissive “how you feel about yourself.” Obviously what is, or is not, shown on a birth certificate has no bearing on biology or gender identity. Furthermore, it is obvious that this has nothing to do with a newborn’s perception of their gender identity which will not form for another two years.
Moreover, Brown’s “gender binary” doesn’t even exist. Most people identify as either male or female. Most people will continue to identify as either male or female.
However nature tends to abhor such simplicity. Gender is actually a continuum with male and female at the extreme ends. No one subscribes to the notion that our propensity to identify as male or female is “oppressive.”
What is oppressive is the attitudes of certain people whose religious beliefs compel them to disregard the fact that gender and natal sex are independent concepts. Furthermore, people who are nonbinary do exist. Denying that simple scientific fact because “the Bible tells me so” is downright idiotic.
Finally some self-serving drivel (I am ignoring the ode to Defender of the Faith and theologist Ryan T. Anderson):
Yes, my friends, God helping us, the day will come when we tell a future generation about this madness, about this day in which those who with the nerve and commitment to challenge this ideological insanity were marginalized and punished. And hopefully, by that time, we will have learned how to help trans-sufferers find wholeness from the inside out.
Do you get the victimhood? The simple fact is that neither Michael Brown nor the aforementioned Ryan T. Anderson have the training and experience to express expertise with regard to human sexuality.
Those blowhards will be marginalized. They deserve to be because they are trying to torture science into conformity with religious doctrine. Furthermore, they employ no small measure of sociopathy. The defense of the faith causes them to marginalize and smear trans persons, some of whom are children.
Changes in treatment will not come from the likes of Brown and Anderson. They are unqualified. If there are changes they will result from evidence-based medical science. Rather than concern for the best interests of an abstract deity, changes, if any, will be in the best interests of real, living people.