Thread by @genspect

@wpath is releasing the 8th version of its Standards of Care, intended as the "gold standard" for transgender health. Between the glaring omissions and the glib assumptions, we think it's unfit for purpose. And we want you to help them sort it out. wpath.org/soc8 1/6

One of the fundamentals of good science is to define your terms… but @wpath's #SOC8 doesn’t even define what "gender dysphoria" is, nor what they mean by "trans". It's hardly a solid basis for a treatment protocol... 2/6

They don’t acknowledge how many young people will naturally desist from a transgender identity. Nor do they explore the experiences of detransitioners, who don’t even get their own dedicated chapter. @wpath's #SOC8 still looks way too much like a one-way street. 3/6

Frighteningly, it turns out that @wpath cites a castration fetish site (!) in these new guidelines – where users post sadomasochistic stories with pedophilic themes, as covered in some detail by @4WPub here:
4w.pub/trans-health-a… 4/6

But while @wpath's #SOC8 WILL mention "male-to-eunuch gender dysphoria", it WON’T mention ROGD — even though this term has stood the test of academic scrutiny, and describes an arc of transgender identification which rings true for many parents of gender-questioning kids. 5/6

We want you to help them sort it out. Go to wpath.org/soc8 and give them your feedback. There’s still time for @wpath to rethink, and get this right.