Shrier did not interview most of the transgender adolescents she wrote about.
Shrier's book tells the stories of several young people who came out as transgender to their parents. The book claims that these adolescents and young adults were not actually transgender, but actually just confused. The problem is Shrier didn't actually interview any of these people she wrote about.
The author’s note points out that she only interviewed their parents, who uniformly did not accept their children’s transgender identities. Many of them were estranged from their kids because the children were so hurt by their parents' rejection. To actually understand the psychology of these young people, one would need to talk to them, not simply rely on stories from parents with whom they do not speak.
To make things worse, the author's note explains that Shrier changed details in the book to ensure the transgender people she wrote about would not be able to recognize themselves. In doing so, she ensured they could not provide their side of the story or point out any inaccuracies in her reporting.
That article states there are reasonable examples of transphobia in the book which is absolutely absurd. Shrier is not transphobic. She covers all your points in numerous interviews. That article is terrible.
Hey, what if medical schools started training people using proper terminology so that when a trans man came in, and discloses that they are trans and pregnant, they can be treated properly? Dumb fuck.
Kobe has always cared about the plight of trans men who get pregnant.
Hey, what if medical schools started training people using proper terminology so that when a trans man came in, and discloses that they are trans and pregnant, they can be treated properly? Dumb fuck.
Kobe has always cared about the plight of trans men who get pregnant.
The complete lack of morals it must take to pretend to care about dead babies as you lie about how they died to make your point.
The trans man in that story told the nurse he had a positive on a home pregnancy test.
Imagine what a pos you would have to be to write that and you pay to read it. Fucking loser.
The trans mans medical records should have had him listed as a woman and mentally ill. But since we can’t say that, everyone has to pretend she’s a man or perhaps she never went to a doctor. Who knows. The consequences of playing make believe while getting society to agree that make believe is normal, is grim. What happen to the “science is real” crowd? The fact that you’re outraged that the nurse didn’t figure out the patient was a woman is even grimmer.
Hey, what if medical schools started training people using proper terminology so that when a trans man came in, and discloses that they are trans and pregnant, they can be treated properly? Dumb fuck.
Agree, they should use male and female. This whole thing would have been avoided if the proper sex was used.
Tell me what part of the review I quoted is a lie.
You can always find a biased source like the one you quoted for the 'review'. Like your sweet twitter scoop 'proving' that Andy Ngo is a liar, or a high school girl that dared to complain about allowing boys to compete against her if they called themselves 'girls'. Keep shitpoasting. I see your tactic is to just call everyone a liar. That's cute and probably works in the little bubble that you live in.
Hey, what if medical schools started training people using proper terminology so that when a trans man came in, and discloses that they are trans and pregnant, they can be treated properly? Dumb fuck.
Agree, they should use male and female. This whole thing would have been avoided if the proper sex was used.
Shrier did not interview most of the transgender adolescents she wrote about.
Shrier's book tells the stories of several young people who came out as transgender to their parents. The book claims that these adolescents and young adults were not actually transgender, but actually just confused. The problem is Shrier didn't actually interview any of these people she wrote about.
The author’s note points out that she only interviewed their parents, who uniformly did not accept their children’s transgender identities. Many of them were estranged from their kids because the children were so hurt by their parents' rejection. To actually understand the psychology of these young people, one would need to talk to them, not simply rely on stories from parents with whom they do not speak.
To make things worse, the author's note explains that Shrier changed details in the book to ensure the transgender people she wrote about would not be able to recognize themselves. In doing so, she ensured they could not provide their side of the story or point out any inaccuracies in her reporting.
Helluva book you got there.
TKS: Have you read Shrier’s book?
If not, STFU, and don’t link someone else’s opinion because it fits the narrative you want to believe.
I read the book. I didn’t get the takeaways that your link did.
Shrier’s book raises a lot of good questions that should be openly and rationally discussed, e.g., why is there a surge in gender dysphoria for teenage women wanting to become men? This was virtually non-existent pre-internet and as recently as 20 years ago.
Comments
Shrier did not interview most of the transgender adolescents she wrote about.
Shrier's book tells the stories of several young people who came out as transgender to their parents. The book claims that these adolescents and young adults were not actually transgender, but actually just confused. The problem is Shrier didn't actually interview any of these people she wrote about.
The author’s note points out that she only interviewed their parents, who uniformly did not accept their children’s transgender identities. Many of them were estranged from their kids because the children were so hurt by their parents' rejection. To actually understand the psychology of these young people, one would need to talk to them, not simply rely on stories from parents with whom they do not speak.
To make things worse, the author's note explains that Shrier changed details in the book to ensure the transgender people she wrote about would not be able to recognize themselves. In doing so, she ensured they could not provide their side of the story or point out any inaccuracies in her reporting.
Helluva book you got there.
But you can listen. There are lots of other interviews. You certainly don’t have to accept it.
https://open.spotify.com/episode/4SIh4Pt39AtGQYzMJMNkv1?si=AccLpAKtQIiRiPS5IsFxMw&dl_branch=1
Food for thought: If you want to present as a man, don't be shocked when people are confused by your pregnancy.
Well, besides the holocaust and communist exterminations anyways.
Always will.
You can always find a biased source like the one you quoted for the 'review'. Like your sweet twitter scoop 'proving' that Andy Ngo is a liar, or a high school girl that dared to complain about allowing boys to compete against her if they called themselves 'girls'. Keep shitpoasting. I see your tactic is to just call everyone a liar. That's cute and probably works in the little bubble that you live in.
If not, STFU, and don’t link someone else’s opinion because it fits the narrative you want to believe.
I read the book. I didn’t get the takeaways that your link did.
Have an open mind.
New Diagnosis: Rapid Onset Gender Dysphoria.