@Andrew4Handel Maybe stop starting threads about issues you can't wrap your tiny brain around. — Benkei

:pray: Fuck yes!

Before I critique your studies... — Andrew4Handel

In other words, before you reject them out of hand because you see criticizing trans people and transgenderism as some sort of religious crusade (as you previously mentioned in a since-deleted thread)?

But you are wrong on the facts here: your "critiques" notwithstanding, there is an abundant body of evidence that sociocultural gender norms help drive crime, violence, and suicide, as you can see from the previously cited sources (and the many others like them). Maybe you disagree about the degree to which they contribute to these things, but you can't credibly deny that there is evidence that it is a factor.

I will look for a counter study for this — Andrew4Handel

How about instead of immediately trying to "counter" this body of scientific/medical counter-evidence, you actually look at it and consider the possibility that you might have been mistaken? Or is that impossible with the whole religious crusade thing? And if you're not open to genuinely considering counter-evidence or counter-arguments, what are we even doing here?

How about instead of immediately trying to "counter" this body of scientific/medical counter-evidence, you actually look at it and consider the possibility that you might have been mistaken? — busycuttingcrap

Let me clarify what you are suggesting are you claiming that the majority of crime is committed by men due to socialisation and is not caused by biology or testosterone?

Are you sayin your studies have proved this under the reason there are millions of men in Americas prisons and elsewhere is due to socialisation?

Wouldn't it be great if it were that simple and we could clear the streets of crime by rearing men to be more like girls.

Wouldn't it be great if it were that simple and we could clear the streets of crime by rearing men to be more like girls. — Andrew4Handel

Finally! An intelligent idea.

Maybe you disagree about the degree to which they contribute to these things, but you can't credibly deny that there is evidence that it is a factor. — busycuttingcrap

I am not denying that that is a factor by any means.

However it depends how you frame the causal relationship.

The societies creating toxic masculinity are shaped by men.

I have been around men where they enforce masculine codes of conducts amongst themselves with no input from women from an early age. Incels are males creating a sub culture amongst them selves whilst blaming women for their problems

Men creating toxic environments for themselves reflects badly on men. Unless you can show that women co-created or solely created toxic male identities.

You stated that:

Has someone posted an explanation yet of why most violence, sex offences and crime per se is committed by men throughout history.

It clearly isn't socialisation. There is no evidence it is socialisation and there is no evidence of a change in trends. — Andrew4Handel

I'm objecting to the bolded part. There is evidence (quite a lot of it in fact) that "socialization", or social expectations and gender norms, help drive crime and violence, and that gender norms (specifically hyper-masculinity) help explain the difference in crime/violence rates between men vs. women... hence the linked studies to that effect.

Wouldn't it be great if it were that simple and we could clear the streets of crime by rearing men to be more like girls.
— Andrew4Handel

Finally! An intelligent idea. — Vera Mont

Yes but girls and women are social constructs and don't really exist we are told.

This whole thread was about celebrating women's behaviours and psychology etc and now you seem to have finally realised it.

Denying the existence of women and girls behavioural traits doesn't leave anything left for men to emulate. Do we we won't Women to act more like men and commit more sex offences and violent crime do we.
No we want men to emulate women ideally and that is why we need to preserve and celebrate the female identity and make the characteristics enviable, desirable and aspirational and not just parodies of social constructs.

Thanks!!

This is why I need to scrutinise the studies you claim support your hypothesis.

This study: "Man enough? Masculine discrepancy stress and intimate partner violence" Questioned 600 men

Before I talk about it in 2019 there were 1,322,256 male prisoners in the states so these men would account for 0.04% of the prison population if it was a sample of them.

Is that sufficient to derive information that would apply to all men in the prison system and that could be used to free these men from incarceration through rehabilitation.

Yes but girls and women are social constructs and don't really exist we are told. — Andrew4Handel

So? If society can construct women with good qualities, it could construct better men.
This isn't mere jocularity: we really ought to do better by our little boys.

This whole thread was about celebrating women's behaviours and psychology etc and now you seem to have finally realised it. — Andrew4Handel

No, I always knew what makes a good person, a good citizen, a good neighbour. It's good behaviour. Men are capable of it; men demonstrate this every minute of every day in every walk of life in every country.

Here is a response to the surgery regret study you linked to:

Letter to the Editor: Regret after Gender-affirmation Surgery: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Prevalence

Expósito-Campos, Pablo MA*; D’Angelo, Roberto PsyD†,

https://journals.lww.com/prsgo/fulltext/2021/11000/letter_to_the_editor__regret_after.29.aspx

"Besides these methodological inaccuracies, data in this field are often of low quality because of “lack of controlled studies, incomplete follow-up, and lack of valid assessment measures,”5 as well as the long amount of time regret can take to manifest (the average and median are estimated at 8–8.5 years2,4). Many of the included studies had participants with follow-up periods of only 1 or 2 years postsurgical transition. None appear to have a long enough follow-up period to reliably identify regret. The study contributing almost half of the participants4 explicitly noted their inclusion of participants with short follow-up time, relative to time to regret, and their large 36% loss to follow-up as limitations. These shorter studies only provide an estimated lower limit, as the large numbers of patients lost to follow-up add correspondingly large uncertainties to any quoted number.

Bustos et al1 acknowledge “moderate-to-high risk of bias in some studies.” Actually, this affects 23 of the 27 studies. The majority of included studies ranged between “poor” and “fair” quality: only five studies—representing just 3% (174) of total participants—received higher quality ratings. However, even these had loss to follow-up rates ranging from 28% to more than 40%, including loss through death from complications or suicide, negative outcomes potentially associated with regret."

Has someone posted an explanation yet of why most violence, sex offences and crime per se is committed by men throughout history.

It clearly isn't socialisation. There is no evidence it is socialisation and there is no evidence of a change in trends. I have never been in a formal situation where men have been encouraged to be antisocial outside of male banter (all male social situations) and the school playground. Men are spontaneously aggressive. Men and women want to do different jobs. Women aren't desperate to be car mechanics and plumbers.

I think there is some reality denial going on and a lack of evidence being presented over quite trite theories and wishful thinking.

Reality doesn't care about feelings and hypothesises.

Someone trying to behave like the opposite sex is futile. I am a male all my behaviour is male by dint of it being mine. I live as a male not a non binary multigendered invented woo entity. — Andrew4Handel

Males (and females, for that matter) in a formal situation are expected to keep any and all emotions in check, so it’s no surprise that ‘anti-social’ behaviour is discouraged. Both males and females are ‘spontaneously aggressive’ - females, more often than not finding themselves inexperienced and underdeveloped when it comes to physical interactions, have learned to use words more than fists, with just as much impact (although far less evident).

Girls who want to be car mechanics or plumbers have been both actively and passively discouraged from such paths from a very young age, by almost everyone and everything, and with various, often well-intentioned reasonings. Boys who want to be nurses or early childhood teachers face similar discouragement from all areas of society.

My daughter, by the age of seven, had effectively banned pink from her wardrobe, and no longer chose to wear dresses or skirts. This came about around the same time she came home and asked the loaded question “Do girls like dinosaurs?” It was a key moment that I felt required careful navigation around the language of identity and belonging. She identified as a girl, and she liked dinosaurs, and all she needed to know was that the two were not mutually exclusive.

I saw this as a conscious move on her part to question and then feel free to reject the socially-determined gender ‘traits’ traditionally expected of her as a ‘girl’, although she still identified as female in all other ways, and continues to, now twelve years later.

Someone trying to behave ‘like the opposite sex’ is not futile, but is a key component of forming identity. I think someone labelling behaviour and traits in this way is trying to enforce a binary concept where the reality of experience is far more complex.

At the private, religious school where I work, two of our high school graduates this year were identified as ‘trans’ - one male-female, the other female-male. The first was fully supported (after much discussion) by family as well as the school community, effectively transitioning their identity from one year of schooling to the next. The second lacked parental support, and so their formal identity with the school remained female, while pastorally and among their peers they were treated as a ‘boy’. As far as I could observe, they were not ‘trying to behave like the opposite sex’, but were attempting to find an identity that worked for them in the majority of their social interactions and experiences.

Personally, I don’t believe either should pursue surgery - I don’t think it should be considered ‘wrong’ for someone biologically male (ie. with a penis) to be referred to as ‘she’, if that’s the identity they’re most comfortable with, and I think that eventually we can get used to this level of uncertainty with regards to gender biology/identity, and conceptual labels such as ‘man’ and ‘woman’ could gradually fall out of use. But it won’t happen overnight, and I think the resistance will continue for a couple of decades yet.

Socialisation is strongest prior to the age of 17, and spending a few years in a predominantly male environment, with little to no interaction with females, does little to increase one’s awareness of their own or their peers’ attitudes towards females. Single-sex education is a perfect example of this - I emerged from five years of girls’ school education with an underdeveloped understanding of gender-based interaction, and could say the same for my sisters and most of my school peers.

There are hundreds of identities and people are having bizarre frankly unethical surgeries like having their nipples or part of their breasts removed to express their androgyny and non binary identities. (I can present photos and links) — Andrew4Handel

This reads to me like an expression of disgust towards trans and gender non-conforming bodies. While your confusion toward all this is understandable - the issue is complex, expressing yourself in this manner is not. You must keep it respectful.

Here is a response to the surgery regret study you linked to: — Andrew4Handel

He has doubts. Doers he have evidence of a higher number? Or a lower one?

Claims of regret are actual irrelevant to the issue of whether the surgeries are ethical and whether people can become the other sex/gender.

The surgeries causes well documented complications and in the case of children who transition complete sterility/infertility and anorgasmia.

But you appear to be taking the same stance as you did on assisted suicide. To me one gay man regretting castrating himself through internalised homophobia is one person to many. But there are several now including this prominent detransitioner who has an increasingly large online presence

but before I get to him the idea men can become women is at odds with the claim men and women only have social imposed differences.

"A detransitioner has told how he was 'brainwashed' into having gender reassignment surgery after believing himself to be a woman trapped in the wrong body.

Going by the name Shape Shifter, the 32-years-old who lives in Massachusetts grew up in a Muslim country in the Balkans where even being gay was frowned upon, but he believed that if he transitioned to female he would finally feel happy with himself."

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11151433/Detransitioner-says-brainwashed-having-gender-reassignment-surgery-woke-doctors.html

"But soon after the operation was complete in 2015 in his mid-20s, Shape Shifter quickly realized he had made a terrible mistake, and that he was just a gay man who enjoyed presenting in a feminine way.

The procedures he has undergone - which include the removal of his penis and the creation of a 'neo-vagina' are irreversible.

They have left him with osteoporosis, scoliosis, a 'vagina' which his body believes is a wound, and which it tries to close up, as well as a host of mental health conditions including depression and a reduced sex-drive. "

This reads to me like an expression of disgust towards trans and gender non-conforming bodies — fdrake

What about the testimonies of trans and detrans people about their surgeries?

Like this.

https://nymag.com/intelligencer/article/gabriel-mac-essay.html

“The whole process is constant body horror,” Berrian said at one point — after he’d told me that the penis-tip discoloration I was worried about might just be sloughing tissue that’s dying off, which is also fine. And this was a recovery with no complications that required surgery. The overall proportion of phalloplasties that need surgical revision, while lower for some surgeons (including mine), is about one in two. The highest number of corrective follow-up surgeries needed by anyone I know personally is 12.

From Gabriel Mac trans man.

This is why I need to scrutinise the studies you claim support your hypothesis. — Andrew4Handel

This isn't "my hypothesis"- as if its just some random conjecture that just occurred to me- its a pretty well-established and widely-acknowledged sociological fact: our gender norms and expectations for men/boys ("hyper-masculinity")- which involve, among other things, valorizing aggression and violence- contribute both to the overall amount of crime, as well as the disparity in crime/violence rates between men vs. women.

And not only is it well-documented, its just sort of obvious: if you raise boys to believe that being tough and violent and aggressive are good and desirable traits for a man to have (and that anything less is negative/undesirable- "being a wimp" or "acting like a girl"), while teaching girls that they are to be quiet and submissive and reserved, you should probably expect to see increased crime/violence rates overall, and a disparity between crime rates between males vs females, as a result.

I also expect that this sort of lifelong habituation and saturation of societal gender norms and expectations isn't something that can be forgotten or eliminated over night- its not like it just magically disappears the moment a trans woman transitions (wrt your previous point).

And not only is it well-documented, its just sort of obvious: if you raise boys to believe that being tough and violent and aggressive are good and desirable traits for a man to have — busycuttingcrap

Here is a study https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3693622/

Testosterone and Aggressive Behavior in Man:

"Atavistic residues of aggressive behavior prevailing in animal life, determined by testosterone, remain attenuated in man and suppressed through familial and social inhibitions. However, it still manifests itself in various intensities and forms from; thoughts, anger, verbal aggressiveness, competition, dominance behavior, to physical violence. Testosterone plays a significant role in the arousal of these behavioral manifestations in the brain centers involved in aggression and on the development of the muscular system that enables their realization. "

"There is evidence that testosterone levels are higher in individuals with aggressive behavior, such as prisoners who have committed violent crimes. "

I am not claiming no crime is affected by socialisation but that it is inadequate to account for the big discrepancies in crimes and prison populations.

From one of your articles:
"Boys learn to be men from the men in their lives, from their own experiences navigating our social norms, and from the large social and cultural context. Boys live under intensified pressure to display gender-appropriate behaviors according to the ideal male code."

...........

As I have said this is men influencing other mens behaviour based on behaviour arising in men. It is explained by men being men and influencing other men to try and attain a copycat masculinity but not based on a totally invented masculinity created by society.

I also expect that this sort of lifelong habituation and saturation of societal gender norms and expectations isn't something that can be forgotten or eliminated over night- its not like it just magically disappears the moment a trans woman transitions (wrt your previous point). — busycuttingcrap

Yes but if someone is going to a big effort to become a woman with large doses of oestrogen in their body, presenting feminine etc they are actively trying to be more like a woman which means you would expect them to be trying to follow women's patterns of behaviour. Like I mentioned above men are acting more aggressive to copy other men so if you were trying to act like a women you should logically see a diminution in male patterns of behaviour or a concerted effort.

Yes but if someone is going to a big effort to become a woman with large doses of oestrogen in their body, presenting feminine etc they are actively trying to be more like a woman which means you would expect them to be trying to follow women's patterns of behaviour. — Andrew4Handel

Except, again, its unreasonable to expect people to just unlearn a lifetime of habituation and social expectation/performance at the drop of a hat. Why would we expect it to work that way? Wouldn't we expect it to take some time to unlearn these (often subconscious) expectations and behaviors?

And I don't see anything in your cited paper or quotes that contradicts what I'm saying- it seems like you're arguing against a different point than the one I'm making. Remember, you said there was "no evidence" that socialization and social factors drive crime and violence, or help explain the difference in crime/violence rates between males and females. I pointed out that there is in fact a fairly large body of evidence (and scholarly consensus) for this. Gender norms, especially those governing masculinity (so, social factors, not biological ones) can and do contribute to the overall amount of crime and violence, and can help explain the disparity in the rates at which males and females commit crimes/violence.

(to be clear: no one is saying that its the only factor, but it is a factor, and there is a good amount of evidence for that)

Claims of regret are actual irrelevant to the issue of whether the surgeries are ethical and whether people can become the other sex/gender. — Andrew4Handel

Here's an argument that the aggregate absence of regret impacts how ethical it is.

( 1 ) If a surgery is not regretted, it was either not felt to be harmful long term, felt to be beneficial or incapacitated the person so much it made such an assessment impossible. (seems an exhaustive disjunction)
( 2 ) Gender affirming surgery is not regretted. (it is rarely regretted, <1% regret rate)
( 3 ) Gender affirming surgery is felt not to be harmful long term or felt to be beneficial or incapacitated the people... (instance of 1)
( 4 ) It didn't incapacitate the people. (It just doesn't remove insight from people)
( 5 ) It therefore is felt not to be harmful or felt to be beneficial. (3,4)
( 6 ) If a decision is felt to be harmful long term, it would be likely to be regretted.
( 7 ) Gender affirming surgery is not likely to be regretted. (citations available).
( 8 ) Gender affirming surgery is not felt to be harmful long term. (7, 6)
( 9 ) Gender affirming surgery is felt to be beneficial long term. (8, 3, 4 - disjunction elimination).

I'm sure you can see how you'd adapt the argument in terms of tendencies rather than strict statements. Like "If a surgery is not regretted by the majority of..." etc.

The surgeries causes well documented complications and in the case of children who transition complete sterility/infertility and anorgasmia.

Less complications than routine surgeries, also gender affirming treatment for young people doesn't tend to have long term consequences - like puberty delaying drugs etc.

What about the testimonies of trans and detrans people about their surgeries? — Andrew4Handel

What about the literal thousands of people the world over wanting gender affirming treatment, surgery and support? What about the tiny rate of regret?

“The whole process is constant body horror,” Berrian said at one point — after he’d told me that the penis-tip discoloration I was worried about might just be sloughing tissue that’s dying off, which is also fine. And this was a recovery with no complications that required surgery. The overall proportion of phalloplasties that need surgical revision, while lower for some surgeons (including mine), is about one in two. The highest number of corrective follow-up surgeries needed by anyone I know personally is 12. — Andrew4Handel

There are three issues here.

The first is that the force of this argument derives largely from trying to make people disgusted, it's an emotional appeal using disgust. That is not a pleasant thing to do in this context, and it is also a bad argument. Rhetorically effective maybe, demonstrative definitely not.

The the second thing is that the rate of complications is rather different from whether the surgery is advisable. EG, someone who will 90% die without surgery X and 50% die because of surgery X should take the surgery. Similarly, someone who will suffer a lot more without surgery X than without surgery X should take the surgery. The overall thrust of your argument there is just invalid.

The third thing is that the premise is at best misleading and at worst wrong. You seem to have used the quote to suggest that this complication is typical, and furthermore that it presents sufficient risk to stop the widespread use of surgeries.

A quick search will show you that the complication rate is lower than typicality 32.5% from a meta analysis, and the paper stresses that the surgery is still of utmost importance for the people who take it. That's M2F genital surgery though. F2M breast removal has much lower rate, approximately the same for F2M genital surgery though. I didn't look up the other surgeries required for it.

The people who need these surgeries give informed consent, they will be extensively briefed on the risks and what can happen. They still consent.

These complication rates also aren't dissimilar to other surgeries - eg here you can see for shoulder arthoplasty, there is at least one complication which occurs about 60% of the time. And this is not seen as an argument against shoulder surgery is it?

Focussing on complications is also worse, I believe, than focussing on rate of regret. Why? Regret is individually based. Attitude after the surgery simultaneously gives you the overall appraisal of the subject (whether it was a good idea, improved their life etc) regardless of the complications and better tracks quality of life changes induced by the surgery. Someone could have a complication and not care, someone could have no complications and think the surgery wasn't worth it.

In that context, the rates of regret for transition are much, much less than common surgeries.

https://journals.lww.com/prsgo/fulltext/2021/03000/regret_after_gender_affirmation_surgery__a.22.aspx
https://archive.nytimes.com/well.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/08/27/regrets-after-prostate-surgery/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4779800/
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/6652388/

Transitioning, prostate, knee, leg in that order. <1% of people who receive the surgery regret it... And there is not widespread disgust toward prostate, knee or leg surgery.


Finally, the article you linked was a good read. You seem to have cherrypicked it though, while the process was body horror, the overall impact of the surgery was identified as strongly positive by the person who had it. They wanted to have a penis, they just didn't want to have only a penis.

This time, I refused to internalize it. There isn’t, I breathed deep, anything wrong with me. I got myself ready and walked on set and stood, nearly nude, compassionate and angry and proud. Whatever was happening around me, I was centered, in my body and in the shots I could see on the monitor, beautiful, accurate — perfect. Days before my penis’s first birthday, the warmth and weight of it lay against my vulva, each supporting the other, holding me.

The only thing in this which forms any sort of argument is a disgust reaction, your disgust, and it's not very nice!

The only thing in this which forms any sort of argument is a disgust reaction, your disgust — fdrake

I think you saying this is very harmful.

Phalloplasty and Vaginoplasty are literally genital mutilation extreme genital mutilation which stops the organs from function and makes them infertile. More severe than widely condemned FGM female genital mutilation.

The low levels of regret are obviously highly suspect because most surgeries should have a substantial level regret due to inevitable complications in some people. I don't know before I have a surgery if it will have complications that I may regret.

Complications but no regret is suspect as well. But knee surgery is to improve mobility and knee function.
Vaginoplasty and orchiectomy destroy function of the penis and fertility.

You are part of creating an Orwellian world to convince people black is white.

Disgust is sometimes an appropriate emotion. It can be a sign of rationality, ethical sense and confronting dysfunction and injustice.

Except, again, its unreasonable to expect people to just unlearn a lifetime of habituation and social expectation/performance at the drop of a hat. Why would we expect it to work that way? — busycuttingcrap

When someone commits to being and a vegan they cut all animal products out of their life. And even If they occasionally slip up and eat animal products they still eat far less than non vegans because they are highly motivated to. You should expect a substantial difference logically.

Have you heard of Autogynophilia?

Phalloplasty and Vaginoplasty are literally genital mutilation — Andrew4Handel

Yikes. More nonsense. They are legitimate (and quite safe) medical interventions, not "genital mutilation" (else doctors would not be allowed to perform them), and they exist for a reason: gender dysphoria is a legitimate medical condition (and a rather unpleasant one from what I gather), and gender-affirming genital surgery is a crucial tool for helping people get relief.

Maybe, but it isn't appropriate in this context (why do you even care about other people's extremely private business in the first place?), nor is this an appropriate place to be simply venting disgust against a highly vulnerable minority group.

If you have things to say on the scientific, medical, ethical, sociological, etc. aspects of transgenderism and trans gender identity, that's great, by all means talk about that (as long as its still within the bounds of the site's posting guidelines, at least). But going on about how transgenderism is evil and wrong and how gender-affirming medical interventions are "genital mutilation" ain't it, chief.

Yikes. More nonsense. They are legitimate (and quite safe) medical interventions, not "genital mutilation" (else doctors would not be allowed to perform them — busycuttingcrap

They should not be allowed to perform them in my opinion. Are you unaware that medics have been highly unethical throughout history and committed lots of acts now considered torture and malpractice?

How would you describe the slicing up of a penis other than mutilation? It categorical cannot be turned into a vagina (which is a muscular canal) so what is it being turned into?

Lili Elbe is one of the most famous trans women in history.

"In 1931, she had her fourth surgery, to transplant a uterus and construct a vaginal canal.[6][7][32][5] This made her one of the earliest transgender women to undergo a vaginoplasty surgery, a few weeks after Erwin Gohrbandt performed the experimental procedure on Dora Richter.[26]

Death
Elbe's immune system rejected the transplanted uterus, and the operation and a subsequent surgical revision caused infection, which led to her death from cardiac arrest on 13 September 1931, three months after the surgery"

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lili_Elbe

No man has had a successful uterus transplant and this one killed Lili

Phalloplasty and Vaginoplasty are literally genital mutilation extreme genital mutilation which stops the organs from function and makes them infertile. More severe than widely condemned FGM female genital mutilation. — Andrew4Handel

A few things here.

Firstly, forced circumcision is seen as unethical because it's forced - doesn't require consent. It inflicts a substantial harm on the person without their consent. Gender affirming surgery is done with consent. This is not a fair comparison.

Secondly, the premise is wrong, F2M genital surgery doesn't stop pregnancy unless the womb is damaged or removed. Even wiki has an article on Transgender Pregnancy. Similarly, M2F surgery can still allow reproduction - people plan ahead and store sperm. It goes without saying, but anyone with male natal sex and the ability to produce sperm can impregnate anyone with female natal sex who is fertile. That can happen regardless of the surgery (so long as reproductive aids are in play) or gender identities of anyone involved.

Thirdly, it doesn't stop the organs from functioning. M2F and F2M surgery recipients can still pee and orgasm. There might be complications with these things... But they don't stop peeing y'know. They also don't necessarily become infertile - see article regarding trans people with wombs and trans people who can produce sperm.

The low levels of regret are obviously highly suspect because most surgeries should have a substantial level regret due to inevitable complications in some people. I don't know before I have a surgery if it will have complications that I may regret. — Andrew4Handel

Well, regret expressed for gender affirming surgery is <1% rate. That came from a meta analysis. I trust that over my own intuitions, I think you should too. Before reading the study I thought the rate would be much higher.

Complications but no regret is suspect as well. But knee surgery is to improve mobility and knee function. — Andrew4Handel

They can also make it prohibitively painful to walk, kill you, give you lasting chronic pain and/or fatigue. I don't think your attitude towards surgery is consistent here. Either apply your disgust to knee surgery and the like or remove it from gender affirming surgery. Some consistency in your ethical preferences please.

Vaginoplasty and orchiectomy destroy function of the penis and fertility. — Andrew4Handel

See above. People prepare for this, it's preferable for the people (See informed consent), the rate of regret is low blah blah blah.

Disgust is sometimes an appropriate emotion. It can be a sign of rationality, ethical sense and confronting dysfunction and injustice. — Andrew4Handel

Disgust is appropriate. Disgust toward a group without reason is prejudice. You're showing us the latter, not the former.

Have you heard of Autogynophilia? — Andrew4Handel

As far as I know, autogynophilia is now a fringe explanation of transgender identity rather than a mainstream one. See here, also as far as I know the popular sources which use it are transphobic. As in, they express revulsion towards trans people and condemn their behaviour.

They should not be allowed to perform them in my opinion. — Andrew4Handel

No offense, but who asked you? Gender dysphoria is a legitimate medical condition, and so if gender-affirming surgery helps people get relief then what's the problem? Who are you to make that determination? How is it our business, who are we to say they shouldn't have access to these procedures? Its not like anyone's forcing you or I to have these surgeries. So why are you so concerned about other people's intensely private and personal medical matters?

I think it is a major issue relating to the truth and even the love of the truth. I've outlined numerous issues on here........ however............

I thought philosophy was The Love of Knowledge and was really concerned about the nature of truth and reality.

To me censoring or vilifying people for misgendering people and making me or others call a Male "She" or a Female "He" is undermining the quest for truth and transparency and authenticity.

It is Undermining people personal beliefs it is engaging in a reality denying exercise and trying to suck society in to it. Getting people to deny their senses when they see a male looking person enter a women toilets. Gaslighting people.
I have called people who are clearly male "she" to be kind and this was before people started chanting "Trans men are men" and demanded we view trans and biological sex as interchangeable and equivalent.

It is a major assault on the truth. It is not a trivial or solely personal issue it effects relationships between people and peoples children are being told they can be born in the wrong body and set on the course for sterilisation and becoming a life long medical patient.

My being gay does not hinge on the approval of others it is not propped up by making people have particular thoughts about me.
Telling people they are hateful for not believing a man can become a woman, opposing child transition and destructive genital surgeries
that is a major psychological exercise at undermining peoples sense of reason and strongly held reality beliefs to follow what amounts to a personal and group religious ideology of invisible gender souls.

You’d think the world was ending because a small minority of people want to live their lives a certain way.

Stop being sucked into these overblown media creations, and do something important.

What a strange thing to be singularly focused on.

Claims of regret are actual irrelevant to the issue of whether the surgeries are ethical and whether people can become the other sex/gender. — Andrew4Handel

Then why are you harping on them?

But you appear to be taking the same stance as you did on assisted suicide. To me one gay man regretting castrating himself through internalised homophobia is one person to many. — Andrew4Handel

Right. So everyone else has to be punished for his mistake. By depriving people of the freedom to choose, you protect them from possible mistakes... and every possibility of self-actualization. like the risk- and happiness-free life of a caged finch.

Disgust is sometimes an appropriate emotion. It can be a sign of rationality, ethical sense and confronting dysfunction and injustice. — Andrew4Handel

It can be anything, including serious emotional dysfunction.

That aside - We're talking about a very, very small portion of the population, which doesn't really affect society in any way, and none of that less than 2% of the population, afaik, has troubled you in any direct way.
So.... what is your problem????