Parallels between “gender affirming care” and ART & PrEP

Similarities in language, just to start

I’d like to share the following video with you today, because I was struck throughout by the similarity in language to the words used to describe “HIV” and its treatment. For one thing, if one has to put “life saving” in front of an intervention such as surgery or medication, said intervention is probably the opposite of life saving. Furthermore, the goals of both “HIV” treatment and PrEP share the distinction with “gender affirming care” in that the patient must necessarily be “retained in care” for life.

Also, they like to throw made-up statistics around—remember the line that PrEP is “99% effective”? That “99%” figure is also presented as the percentage of trans-identifying individuals that are happy with their transition and do not attempt to detransition, which is just a flat out lie. The study cited in this video suggests that the regret rate is not 1%, but 30% or even higher. (Plus, if it’s really 1%, the trans activists ought to be clamoring for this to be looked into, if only to bolster their claim. They are doing the opposite of clamoring, which should tell you everything.)

It’s also interesting that nowadays, most trans-identifying individuals are women, who often have multiple comorbidities such as autism spectrum disorder and chronic fatigue syndrome. How tragic that even now, when women are recognized as full human beings under the law—and it hasn’t even been that long in the grand scheme of history—some women are being conned into this idea that their womanhood is something to be rejected, to the point that they’ll medicate themselves with testosterone and even have their healthy breasts removed. How is this “life saving,” exactly?

Make no mistake, the transgender agenda has women and gay people—it’s really the modern version of conversion therapy—in its crosshairs. It needs to be called out, and be stopped.