Dr. Littman, you seem to have skipped the beginning of my thread. As I note, those studies used DSM-IV GID criteria, which one can meet without identifying as a gender different from one's sex assigned at birth (a problem fixed with the DSM-5 GD dx).https://twitter.com/jack_turban/status/1295235993662926850?s=20 …
-
-
Replying to @jack_turban
Dr. Turban, you are correct that the existing desistance studies did not use the DSM V criteria (as they used the criteria that was in use at the time the kids were seen). However, the research shows that 67.2% of those meeting (pre-DSM V) ...
2 replies 1 retweet 33 likes -
Replying to @LisaLittman1 @jack_turban
...criteria desisted. We definitely need more research to establish desistance rates. But the 67.2% are the best data we have currently for kids who are not treated with puberty blockers....
2 replies 0 retweets 38 likes -
Replying to @LisaLittman1 @jack_turban
Your statement “a large proportion of the kids in those studies didn’t even meet GID criteria” —isn’t a reason to discard the desistance studies because there has been an analysis that separates those who didn’t meet criteria from those who did.
2 replies 0 retweets 33 likes -
Replying to @LisaLittman1
There are multiple reasons to not to use the data in this way: (1) the DSM-IV vs DSM-5 issue I've now raised 3 times, (2) misinterpreting data about children to make conclusions about adolescents, (3) including children who didn't meet even DSM-IV criteria in the studies.
1 reply 0 retweets 6 likes -
Replying to @jack_turban @LisaLittman1
The first (the one you continue to ignore) is arguably the most important, and why I listed it first in my thread.
1 reply 0 retweets 7 likes -
Replying to @jack_turban
I don’t agree that the reasons you list justify ignoring the desistance research that exists- especially given that there are no desistance studies yet using DSM V to refute or confirm those findings.
2 replies 1 retweet 55 likes -
Replying to @LisaLittman1
I didn't "ignore" the research, Dr. Littman. I analyzed it and pointed out the objective ways in which you are misinterpreting the data You are welcome to not "agree" with my opinions, but you are not welcome to ignore objective facts with the goal of confirming your own biases
2 replies 0 retweets 7 likes -
Replying to @jack_turban @LisaLittman1
4thWaveNow Retweeted 〽️ars ⚓️
Dr. Turban, anyone paying attention is aware that there a growing number of post-adolescent desisters. Many have begun speaking publicly. Here is a recent interview conducted, incidentally, by a trans man. Perhaps you might consider your own biases?https://twitter.com/_Mars_F/status/1293971105766572032?s=20 …
4thWaveNow added,
2 replies 6 retweets 33 likes -
It's mystifying that you seem so resistant to acknowledging those who did NOT benefit from adopting a trans identity. There are happily transitioned people who don't seem to have a problem doing that, e.g.,
@BuckAngel who recently has begun to speak in support of detransitioners.1 reply 0 retweets 11 likes
There are number of lesbians who came to realize that their temporary trans identity actually set them back in their process of maturation & self-acceptance. It appears it's difficult for you to understand their experiences. Why not try? @BenjaminABoycehttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QAMar22S0ck&feature=youtu.be …
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.