Gender dysphoria is often in fact autism

Gender dysphoria is often in fact autism This is interesting to me as a high functioning autistic. But there are of course many varieties of autism. The tale below sounds partly familiar. I have always had male friends but not so much.

Source: Gender dysphoria is often in fact autism.

How many trans-identified children “desist”? That is, how many identify as transgender for a time, and then eventually stop doing so, prior to medical intervention (as distinct from detransitioners, who return to identifying with their natal sex after undergoing some form of medical transition)? The answer is that no one knows, in part because few experts are keeping track, and in part because what research does exist is highly politicized.

Some trans activists and advocates, for instance, object to the very idea of measuring “desistance” in the first place, on the argument that this approach may discourage a child from embracing a transgender identity. One Canadian trans activist and researcher insists that research in this area is simply “not relevant when deciding between models of care.” Others claim that the idea of desistance is rooted in transphobic “myth,” though research often shows otherwise.

High-end estimates of desistance tended to arise from longitudinal studies of children who first reported gender dysphoria at an early age. The vast majority of those children resolved their gender dysphoria before, or early in, puberty. In one 2021 study published in Frontiers in Psychiatry, for instance, 88 percent of boys with gender dysphoria were found to have desisted by their teens or adulthood (and more than 63 percent were same-sex attracted). These results are consistent with established research; yet, in the current ideological climate, they often are seen as suspect. That’s because the traditional “watchful waiting” approach used by clinicians to treat children who present with gender dysphoria—which tends to be associated with a high rate of desistance—has largely been supplanted by a policy of encouraging social transition, an approach associated with an increase in observed dysphoria. Indeed, several studies show that nearly all children on puberty blockers go on to cross-sex hormones.



I’ve seen a number of FB memes extolling the virtues of reading banned books and listing books that seem relatively innocuous (which is by design because those creating the lists want you to be surprised by the stupidity of those doing the banning) to most people. However, as with the term “anti-vax” getting thrown in the face of those who are anti-mandate, the term “banned” really has no meaning when you realize that anybody can take that list of books to Amazon, or down to their local Barnes & Noble, or their public library and find and buy or check out every. Single. One.

For a book to be truly banned the government needs to step in and forbid and punish the printing and distribution of a book. Like, oh, say what the Soviets did, or what Kim Jong Un does, or what the CCP does…you know, what totalitarian governments do. I challenge anybody getting their knickers in a twist over “banned” books to tell me which of the books on that list are forbidden to be printed, sold, or possessed in the United States. Go on. I’ll wait.


But back to the current self-aggrandizing book banning kerfuffle. Just because a high school or elementary school pulls books from its school library or is asked to pull books, does not mean those books are banned. It means that parents at those schools do not think the book is appropriate for the students at that school. As I asked previously, if you are the parent of an eleven-year old, are you comfortable with them reading erotica? Are you comfortable with them reading about kids “exploring their sexuality” in very explicit ways? Be honest now.


So, for all those preening over their “support” for banned books…have you stood up for authors that left has tried to cancel? Which is banning? Have you read books by authors with whom you may find yourself disagreeing? Have you told anybody that the response of “well, they’re just not printing any more of that book because it’s racist, but they’re not banning it” amounts to a soft ban? Have you read Huckleberry Finn? Is it a product of its time? Is that horrifying to you? Do you think that Mark Twain should have known that the future would find his books “problematic?”

If you’re patting yourself on the back for reading books on the lists that are going around, why? Did you, like Russians passing around samizdat risk your life to have that book in your possession? Did you get one copy of the book and then type it out so that the typed copies could be distributed…when carbon paper was illegal to own? Have you ever photocopied a book for someone? Was that illegal where you were?

If the answer to any of the above questions is “no” then you haven’t read a banned book. You’ve read a book that some parents or some leftist, or some Karen didn’t like. Those people aren’t actually preventing you or your kids from reading the book in question, are they? Are other parents monitoring what their kids read? Yes. Is it your problem or your business? No.

Books that get pulled from a school library are not banned. If you are upset with your kids’ school librarian pulling a book, get off your ass and buy a copy and give it to your kid. Tell them to read it and pass it along. Or even better, if it’s that important to you, buy several copies, donate a few to your local public library and put the rest out on your front porch with a “FREE” sign.