Originally Posted by
Lea Paine
The SOCs have been refined over time, of course. They are not universally used, though referencing them has become the norm. The description I gave is the context behind the earlier comment on defending the cisgender population. And much of what I described was still being applied by physicians as recently as the 90s.
A lot of this relates to the cis focus on "The Magic Sex Change" - the complete horror of SRS and their invariable fascination with it. An extreme to be guarded against at all possible costs! A tragedy beyond description! Yet most transsexuals will tell you that it's one of the lesser points of transition - an important last step for some, not even a thought for some others. Transition happens before the surgery. We're told in our society to keep our hands (politically and medically) off women's bodies, but not transsexual women's bodies. Reproductive rights are an individual choice, hence a woman may elect a tubal or hysterectomy, but SRS must be guarded because of the possibility of "mistake," with hand-wringing over the poor post-op's inability to father children. Life altering personal choice is permitted in a million areas of life - except for transsexuals. The angst is all about the binary. All or nothing, and - MY GOD! - the concern is always about MtFs because, after all, the worst thing on Earth is that man become a woman. THAT mistake has to be guarded against above all others!
The legal argument is over-wrought. Doctors, hospitals & clinics, medical device manufacturers, drug companies, et al - are sued all the time in this country already. It's one of THE most heavily litigated professions. There's an argument over whether it changes medicine and to what degree (e.g., more unnecessary testing) - or whether modern medicine simply seeks more diagnostic certainty anyway because it can. A Charles Kane case in the US would be another blip from a process and cost perspective.
Lea
