#and walk away thinking 'hm that zucker fellow seems reasonable. competent scientists will respect that citation.'

[keelanrosa]

terfs when a study shows literally anything positive about trans people/transitioning: 'hm i think this requires some fact-checking. Were those researchers REALLY unbiased? Because if they were biased this doesn't count and if they weren't knowingly biased they probably were unconsciously biased, woke media affects so much these days. Have there been any other studies on this? Because if there haven't been this could be an outlier and if there have been and they all agree that's a bit odd, why aren't there any outliers, and if there have been and any disagree we really won't know the truth until we very thoroughly analyze them all, will we? Were there enough subjects for a good sample size? Did every single subject involved stay involved through the whole study because if they didn't we should be sure nothing shady was going on resulting in people dropping out. Are we 110% sure all the subjects were fully honest and at no point were embarrassed or afraid to admit they didn't love transitioning to the people in charge of their transition? Are we 110% sure none of the subjects were manipulated into thinking they were happy with their transition? In fact we should double-check what they think with their parents, because if the subjects and their parents disagree it's probably because they've been manipulated but their cis parents have not and are very unbiased. How many autistic subjects were there because if there weren't enough then this doesn't really study the overlap between autistic and trans and if there were too many then we just don't know enough about what causes that overlap to be sure this study really explains being trans and isn't just about being autistic. How many AFAB subjects were there because if there weren't enough this is just another example of prioritizing AMAB people and ignoring the different struggles of girls and women and if there were too many how do we know sexism didn't affect the results. Was the study double-blinded? We all know double-blinded is the most reliable so if this one wasn't that's a point against it even if the thesis literally physically could not be double-blinded. Look i'm not being transphobic, i want what's best for trans people! Really! But as a person who is not trans and therefore objective in a way they cannot possibly be, i just think we should only take into account Good Science here. You want to be following science and not being manipulated or experimented upon by something unscientific, right?'

terfs when they see a study of 45 subjects so old it predates modern criteria for gender dysphoria and basically uses 'idk her parents think she's too butch', run by a guy who practiced conversion therapy, 'confirmed' by a guy who treated the significant portion of subjects who didn't follow up as all desisting, definitely in the category of 'physically cannot double-blind this', completely contradicted by multiple other studies done on actual transgender subjects, but can be kinda cited as evidence against transitioning if you ignore everything else about it: 'oOOH SEE THIS IS WHAT WE'RE TALKIN BOUT. SCIENCE. Just good ol' unbiased thorough analysis. I see absolutely no reason to dig any deeper on this and if you think it's wrong you're the one being unscientific. It's really a shame you've been so thoroughly brainwashed by the trans agenda and can't even accept science when you see it. Maybe now that someone has finally uncovered this long-lost study from 1985, we can make some actual progress on the whole trans problem.'

#science #transphobia #cass review #less 'cass review' generally more 'zucker specifically' because this same problem exists outside cass #have lost count of the number of times i've seen 'well THAT study may have said most trans kids persist but it MUST be wrong' #'there's another study says the exact opposite. that one's right. obviously.' #but cass is why i'm annoyed by it now #normally i don't have a problem with critical observations and questions. yeah check your science! that's good! #there have been some bullshit studies and some bullshit interpretations of good studies! scientific literacy is important! #and normally also am willing to pretend the people pulling reaction 1 on some studies and reaction 2 on others are. not the same group. #but now there's a ton of cass supporters tryna say 'oh the cass review didn't reject or downplay anything for being pro-trans!' #'some studies just weren't given much weight for being poor evidence! not our fault those were all studies with results trans people like!' #…….………….aight explain why zucker's findings are used for the 'percentage of trans kids who don't stay trans' stat instead of anyone else's. #would've been more scientifically accurate to say 'yeah we just don't know.' #'studies have been done but none of them fit our crack criteria sooooo *shrug*' #like COME ON at least PRETEND you're genuinely checking scientific correctness and not looking for excuses to weed out undesirable results #am also mad about zucker in particular because his is possibly the most famous bullshit study #quite bluntly if you're doing trans research and think 'yeah this one seems reasonable' you. are maybe not well-informed enough for the job #there's just no way you genuinely look at the research with an eye toward accurate science regardless of personal bias #and walk away thinking 'hm that zucker fellow seems reasonable. competent scientists will respect that citation.' #that's one or two steps above doing a review of vaccine science and seriously citing wakefield's mmr-causes-autism study #it doesn't matter what the rest of your review says people are gonna have OPINIONS on that bit #and outside anti-vaxxers most of those opinions will be 'are you actually the most qualified for this because ummmm.' #people who agree with everything else will still think someone more competent could've done a much better job #people who disagree with everything else will point to that as proof you don't know shit and why should we listen to you #anyway i'd love a hugeass trans science review with actual fucking standards hmu if you know of one cause this ain't it #……does tumblr still put a limit on how many tags you can include guess me and my tag essay are about to find out.