Everyone in the entire medical establishment are professional nutcases?
I'm just looking for some citations backing up our side and after over 10 pages have yet to see 1 study/paper/medical professional back it up. Perhaps they are all morally wrong but if you want to claim they are medically wrong you need to back that claim up please.
You want any examples? Google is happy to oblige.
"Many children who experience gender
dysphoria (GD), a sense of discomfort
from incongruence between their gen-
der identity and assigned sex, will not con-
tinue to experience dysphoria into adolescence
and adulthood. However, a substantial minority
(2–27% across studies) will continue to report GD
and may seek services for gender reassignment
later in life. To date, the prospective follow-up
studies on children with GD, for whom the
majority would meet the DSM-IV-TR diagnostic
criteria for Gender Identity Disorder (GID)1
collectively reported on the outcomes of 246
children. At the time of follow-up in adolescence
or adulthood, these studies showed that, for the
majority of children (84.2%; n ¼ 207), the GD
desisted.2 These studies were conducted across
several decades during which the opportunity
and social acceptance for gender reassignment
has increased dramatically. The current study
focuses on children in a context in which gender
reassignment is available, generally socially
accepted, and covered by health insurance."
https://www.transgendertrend.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/10/Steensma-2013_desistance-rates.pdfThis isn't an argument that can really be determined in the favor of those claiming that the medical field is in unanimous consensus regarding the fact that these children will maintain their dysphoria into adulthood and the the appropriate course of treatment is to proceed with irreversible gender affirming surgery on their behalfs. All it takes is one dissenting opinion, and that goes away.
That's the problem with saying everyone says something. It's not very hard to prove that it isn't everyone. Then we start discrediting the validity and legitimacy of various sources and opinions, and engaging in labeling and ad hominem attacks. Most threads follow a fairly predictable pattern.
Insert hamster gif here.