#but prev tags: it *is* a transmedicalist argument so

[tacticalhimbo]

we love to see the classic argument that affirmation has to come from a place of suffering (sarcastic).

the criteria for gender dysphoria are entirely irrelevant, as affirming one's gender (identity, expression, whatever term you wanna use) is simply that. doing/having access to what makes you as an individual feel more secure in yourself/your expression/your identity. it's not an exclusively trans concept at all, and i wish that perception would die.

sure, the concept largely and popularly associated/correlated with the trans community, but there is an equally popular saying:

correlation =/= causation.

cis people can do things that affirm their gender just as trans folks can.

the euphoria (feelings of confidence, importance, etc) that a cis man feels from doing traditionally masculine tasks is literally no different than the euphoria i feel from doing the same tasks as a nonbinary guy. we both feel more attuned to our masculinity.

likewise, a cis man and a transmasculine individual both can receive testicular implants to aid in their sexual ability. the exact same procedure, too: scrotoplasty. the reasons for receiving this care are different depending, as is... every other form of intervention, but it serves to achieve the same thing (relatively speaking; technicalities always apply, but again that's just the nature of medicine. shit impacts people differently).

it's separative thinking like this that paves the way for the fascism we see in the united states (and other places) currently. the othering and pathologization of the trans individual allows for the leash to be tightened.

just look into florida's recent laws to find the proof. our government did so much work creating the stark differences between cis and trans individuals that, now, adult care is up for bargain and doctors can turn down cis patients if they feel their expression/beliefs go against a doctor's personal "ethical and moral code".

and before it's said, two things can be true at once.

it is important to recognize and validate the feelings of folks with dysphoria and/or incongruence. however, it is also important to recognize that not every person under the trans umbrella will meet these criteria, and that does not make them any less valid in their identity/expression.

to insinuate it does is reductive and, frankly, fascist. the original sentiment of the post is 100% true and it is a hill i will die on.

edit: also that last line is so confusing to me. this isn't a matter of putting personal feelings over a patient's. the entire argument is structured around the idea that this language/narrative is inclusive of all patients. this is like saying the usage of "birthing parent" erases anybody who identifies with the term "mother". it doesn't, and it's naive to think it does. it simply gives people options. which, you know, should always be the case in patient-centered care.

normalize calling viagra and menopausal hormone treatments gender affirming care