I'm saying it's just completely bonkers to claim that it's easy to do studies of gender dysphoric kids. There are a million reasons it isn't. This is one of those things where if you just spend some time talking to clinicians and researchers, you wouldn't mess it up.
-
This is an impossible conversation because you won't stop putting words in my mouth Me: It's hard to study GD kids You: So you're saying ROGD is super common??? Me: Have you talked to a kid who thinks they had it? You: So you're saying the "trans lobby" is to blame??? SIGH
You're upset because, in a comment (not an article) I said it was easy to study GD kids, when what I probably should have said was that if ROGD existed real researchers would be able to find evidence of it. I guess I... apologize for slightly exaggerating in an internet comment?
-
-
I just think a lot of otherwise smart people writing about this subject haven't done basic legwork on all the messy clinical stuff. But this is like in the 10th percentile of fuckups on this issue. I also recognize how concepts like ROGD can be weaponized. Briefly: It would be
-
very hard to study supposedly ROGD kids at this early stage doing anything BUT what Littman did. You'd need access to a whole cohort at a gender clinic, then would have to go through the records and search for candidates, etc. etc. What she did strikes me as a pretty normal first
- Show replies
New conversation -
-
-
I thought you had a more substantive critique of the underlying point, but I guess it's really as shallow as "you shouldn't have said 'easily' you should have said 'would have found evidence for by now'.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
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.