A Variety of Modalities--Part 5 of “A Layperson Reads the World Professional Association for Transgender Health (WPATH) Standards of Care for the Health of Transgender and Gender Diverse People, Version 8”

Are you still against being forced to treat a woman as if she is, in fact, a man just because she demands that you do so? Do you oppose the chemical castration of teenage boys? Then you need to be “educated.”

One lesson to be drawn from our project of reading through the World Professional Association for Transgender Health (WPATH) Standards of Care for the Health of Transgender and Gender Diverse People, Version 8 is that the most effective weapon in the arsenal of the transgenderist movement is its ability to make those who oppose it seem a) intolerant and b) lacking in expertise.

The movement employs the language of dignity and respect for others. It cleverly combines appeals to the better nature of its audiences with the language of authority. It uses words like “compassion” and “healthcare” even as it advocates such practices as using chemicals to try to turn healthy girls into pseudo-boys and removing healthy ovaries. It employs jargon and euphemisms to try to normalize such practices in the medical profession and from there to society as a whole.

In this, the fifth installment of our series, “A Layperson Reads the World Professional Association for Transgender Health (WPATH) Standards of Care for the Health of Transgender and Gender Diverse People, Version 8,” we discuss Chapter 4 Education.

In this installment, we will need to quote not so much from the chapter of the standards itself but from one of the articles in the professional literature that it cites. We will do this because the language in the chapter is so misleadingly bland that it is only by examining what is meant by “education” in this chapter that we can see how dangerous the Standards of Care are to children and other vulnerable people.

The chapter we are examining today starts out innocuously enough:

CHAPTER 4 Education

This chapter will provide a general review of the literature related to education in transgender and gender diverse (TGD) health care. Recommendations are offered at governmental, nongovernmental, institutional, and provider levels with the goal of increasing access to competent, compassionate health care. In turn, this increased access should improve health outcomes in TGD populations. As this is a novel chapter in the World Professional Association for Transgender Health (WPATH) Standards of Care, the intent is to lay the groundwork for the education area and invite a broader and deeper discussion among educators and health professionals.

We are told that:

The World Bank Group (2018) reports widespread discrimination, harassment, violence, and abuse affecting TGD people. They also report TGD people face the highest rates of violence and discrimination (World Bank Group, 2018).

Hmm, I would think that many women would beg to differ, but one does not want to get dragged into victimhood hierarchy battles or ever question that the unelected global bureaucrats at the World Bank have our best interests at heart.

We are told:

Although health professions have begun to incorporate TGD health into education using a variety of modalities and at varying levels of training, efforts differ by health profession and are neither systemic nor systematic in nature…

And we are told that, say, if we choose to refuse to be forced to refer to a troubled man draped in what he considers to be feminine attire as a woman, we are meanies:

Attaining cultural humility with the full appreciation of the intersectionality of humanity is an ultimate educational goal.

Note the sweeping generalizations here—as if it is now a given that the values of the transgenderism movement (which is one of the most misogynistic belief systems on the face of the planet, given its eagerness to deem any man who claims he is a woman to be such) are the only values that matter and that chopping off healthy body parts from the bodies of healthy people is evidence-based:

All the statements in this chapter have been recommended based on a thorough review of evidence, an assessment of the benefits and harms, values and preferences of providers and patients, and resource use and feasibility.

Here we come to the nitty-gritty of the chapter—if WPATH gets it way, medical providers around the world will have to pledge fealty to the transgenderist agenda and mouth untruths such as that men are women:

Statements of Recommendations

4.1- We recommend all personnel working in governmental, nongovernmental, and private agencies receive cultural-awareness training focused on treating transgender and gender diverse individuals with dignity and respect.

4.2- We recommend all members of the health care workforce receive cultural-awareness training focused on treating transgender and gender diverse individuals with dignity during orientation and as part of annual or continuing education.

4.3- We recommend institutions involved in the training of health professionals develop competencies and learning objectives for transgender and gender diverse health within each of the competency areas for their specialty.

It is important for health care workers to treat everyone with competence and compassion. It is quite another thing to demand that workers in any field be repeatedly subjected to (and, in the case of continuing education, to have to pay for them themselves) pro-transgenderist indoctrination sessions.

Here we come to a spot at which to take a close look at one of the references the authors provide for specifics of what they mean by “education.” Take this article, for example. In it, we read:

A growing body of research continues to elucidate health inequities experienced by transgender individuals and further underscores the need for medical providers to be appropriately trained to deliver care to this population. Medical education in transgender health can empower physicians to identify and change the systemic barriers to care that cause transgender health inequities as well as improve knowledge about transgender-specific care.

Note that it is an article of faith among transgender activists that those who have chosen to mutilate themselves and engage in heavy use of hormones and other substances and who, not surprisingly, develop health problems as a result, are victims of systemic inequity. Basically, transgenderism creates health problems and the people who have done this to themselves then complain about supposed disparities in care:

Clinicians should be trained to recognize long-term health outcomes associated with gender-affirming interventions (eg, dyslipidemias associated with estrogens and erythrocytosis associated with testosterone)

Just a reminder that in the Orwellian world of transgenderism, “gender-affirming” means, in this case, using quasi-medical means to aid in the renouncing of one’s actual sex in favor of a preferred “identity.”

One should also note that far from being victims of healthcare inequities, those who claim to be “trans” are responsible for the extensive, expensive reconfiguring of the entire medical system around their “identities” and their now much increased and entirely self-inflicted vulnerability to disease and discomfort:

Transgender patients should have their sex assigned at birth and current anatomical inventory recorded within the medical record to facilitate appropriate timely delivery of preventive care interventions, as cancer screening needs to be based on existing anatomy.

This passage perfectly captures the weird language of transgenderism. The transgenderists say to us that we were not born as infant boys or infant girls (save for the tragic and tiny population of those who are not). We were “assigned” a sex at birth. And thanks to the grotesque practices of “transgender medicine,” men can now boast of “anatomical inventory items” like artificial vaginas.

And medical providers need to be “educated” on how all of this is a good idea.

The article, revealingly, mentions that much of this “education” has nothing to do with medicine (which is also true of WPATH itself) but with politics and radical gender ideology:

Three interventions were associated with increased knowledge of trans-specific social and political concepts that are important to transgender health care. An optional lunchtime series was associated with increased knowledge about federal policies impacting transgender health…A family medicine clerkship module was associated with knowledge about health disparities facing transgender patients, as well as basic concepts relevant to transgender and LGB health, like the distinction between sexuality and gender

Note how the transgenderist movement wants to subsume men and women into an all-encompassing nonbinary blob and to stifle the normal process of puberty in young people—and this is all part of the educational regime that the WPATH standards are designed to promulgate, promote and regularize:

Authors of studies throughout this body of literature suggested incorporating transgender clinical competencies across the curriculum rather than in one or two condensed lectures. Doing so would reinforce topics in their relevant clinical context with emphasis over time. A longitudinal incorporation of transgender health topics into the standard curriculum would also support its disaggregation from the generalized topic of LGBTQ health. For example, this could include discussions of sex organs as opposed to “male and female genitalia” in anatomy, or a discussion of gender identity during lectures on puberty. Because of the issues discussed here, one-time interventions for transgender education are insufficient to create sustainable learning and clinical improvements.

The campaign to transform medicine along transgenderist lines is clear enough here:

Shifting program director attitudes, expanding fellowship opportunities that provide skills for transgender populations (eg, gender-affirming surgeries), and conferment of credibility of these topics through accreditation were identified as ways to build pedagogical platforms to teach transgender-relevant clinical skills.

This campaign affects not only medical people who are being forced to state that “gender-affirming surgeries” (which can include the removal of healthy testicles from healthy men and pasting onto a woman an artificial penis) are perfectly normal procedures, but our entire culture. If you do not want to teach medical students that it is okay to remove the healthy breasts of a healthy 14-year-old girl, you need to shift your attitude, say the transgenderists. The standards say so, after all and we told by their creators that they are the new bible of best practices.

And note how much of the campaign, again, is a revolutionary political project that has nothing to do with the practice of medicine:

Integration of important aspects of transgender health may be appropriately placed into lectures and other curricular content traditionally focused on cisgender people including topics such as breast cancer screening and fertility…

Incorporate pedagogical interventions that improve attitudes toward and awareness of transgender health inequities, which is foundational to imparting clinical skills to address such inequities.

And these damning quotes are from just one of the articles amongst the blizzard of references Chapter 4 Education of the standards provides to bolster its case for “education” as it sees it. These examples show the political and social implications of the growing power of WPATH and advocacy groups like it.

Let’s get back to what Chapter 4 Education itself says.

Like so much of the worldwide elite, the authors of the chapter are full-blown cultural imperialists:

It is the responsibility of the governmental, nongovernmental, and private agencies in these countries with anti-discrimination laws to ensure the rights of the TGD population. They are, therefore, obligated to find ways in which discrimination and stigma can be decreased. One of these is through education. Local cultures that foster anti-TGD attitudes are often a barrier to this needed education.

Those pesky local cultures that insist on objecting to ghastly surgeries being performed in their localities and who try to prevent the grooming of their children by transgender activists.

The chapter concludes with suggestions on how to thrust the transgenderist agenda into the heart of academic medicine and the medical system—from medical education to orientation of employees to continuing education:

To successfully implement the recommendations, institutions may need to consider developing 1) systemic and systematic approaches to developing and implementing competencies for each health discipline across the professional lifespan; 2) standardized assessments for learners, with input from the TGD community; and 3) allotment of curricular resources, including trained faculty, as well as time in accordance with clear, consensual learning objectives

None of this is about “dignity” or “respect” (it is hard to see how cutting a healthy penis or a healthy breast off comports with those ideals). It is about power and empire building by a group of people with some very disturbing beliefs—and willingness to act them out on the bodies of troubled adults and children.

We should all read each chapter of the standards—and when they seem unobjectionable enough, don’t assume that nothing sinister is afoot. Be sure to read as much as you can of the references given (some, alas, are behind paywalls).

We have worked out way through Chapter 4 Education of the standards. There are 18 chapters in all. We have quite a ways to go yet—we have not even gotten to the chapters dealing with children and adolescents. There are horrors yet to come.

Subscribe to Crazy Radicals

Don’t miss out on the latest issues. Sign up now to get access to the library of members-only issues.
jamie@example.com
Subscribe