I have argued before that states should neither enforce nor ban access to (elective) abortion. I have displayed my disdain for concierge medicine. I am on the fence about whether we should socialize healthcare, or maybe just demand that prices be artificially set so we can afford them out of pocket, and no longer need insurance to cover our costs.

As a transsexual, you would probably expect me to demand that all healthcare plans, from Medicaid/Medicare to all private insurances, cover sex change therapies. That insurances should cover puberty blockers for trans children. That trans women should also be allowed laser treatments to remove their body hair.

I think, first of all, the WPATH has succumbed to the radicalization of transgenders who now think any kind of gender variance now automatically means you’re “trans”. The standards of care they once promoted was respectable—you go seek a therapist to make sure that your desire to live as a member of the opposite sex is genuine, and not because of some illusion that they have it “better”, because you have something like autism that makes you think differently, because you’re a drag performer trying to use insurance to cover cosmetic surgery to look more “realistic”. Then, with a written letter of permission, you take the real life test for some prescribed time to make sure it’s what you want (sometimes concurrently with or before you’re allowed to take hormones), and then get more advanced sex change remedies to finally allow you to live full time as a member of the opposite sex.

Until this past decade, almost no insurance would cover anything; trans people would be essentially using their life savings, and hustling to no end, to afford sex change therapies and surgeries. (Yes, often by doing sex work, which is why there is a strong correlation between trans women and sex work.)

What most people don’t realize is, most of the history of the advancement of sex change therapy was not to help trans women effeminate their bodies. Estrogen on male bodies was researched as a form of “chemical castration”, to punish men accused of “buggery”/”sodomy” (when gay sex was illegal), of rape, and other sex crimes. Dr. Harry Benjamin developed, at least for the United States, operations to help same-sex couples have one partner feminize or masculinize their appearance so they could conform to “heteronormative” standards and appearances.

Despite what transtrenders and “transgenders” are demanding, 14 or so states from the 80s onward had a legal process in place to help transsexuals achieve a complete legal sex change, too. Once you could provide proof that you got your medical sex change, you brought your doctor’s letter and current legal documents in for the state to process, and it was a done deal. All your legal documents showed you underwent the psychological, medical, and sociological changes to live as a member of the opposite sex, and that you now earned the benefit to legally live as one, too.

Which leads me back to my question(s): should insurances be mandated to cover transsexual medicine? Should governments be allowed to ban their coverage? Unlike abortion, where being a slut or getting into situations that result in unplanned pregnancies is all too often a choice, it’s more nuanced. I still think it should be up to the policy holders in a plan to determine whether or not they want to cover it. I think it would be best for most coverages, for liability reasons, to return to “gatekeeping” and demand that people who want HRT and SRS undergo 6-12 months of counselling (just like they would for any other psychiatric issue!!) and the real-life test, before implementing anything. With my sex change, I had to obtain a letter from a therapist I was seeing for other mental health issues to show I was mentally sound—totally reasonable, I think if other mental or health issues arise during the transition, I think it’s reasonable for the insurance to have before deciding if they will cover or not.

I think, if a company was to present itself as “inclusive”, as “progressive”, or really want hire and retain the best talent, it would be in their best interest to cover transsexual healthcare costs into their health plan. But, if a company is pretty small, or many of the workers live on wages where costs are a major concern, it should also be allowed to drop coverage to keep costs down and existing funds available for other health needs. (Last I checked, a parent with a child who has cancer could definitely use those funds a lot more than someone seeking a sex change. That child is more likely to die from their cancer than the trans person, because they haven’t developed decent coping methods to deal with gender dysphoria.) If someone thinks they’re trans and the policy doesn’t cover it, then they should either pay out of pocket, find an employer who does cover it, pick up a side hustle or job that does, or learn to live with the dysphoria.

How much of a sex change should a person entail before the states should re-issue birth certificates and other legal documents? I think for trans men, a double mastectomy and removal of their reproductive organs are more than sufficient, as metoidioplasty and phalloplasty are very imperfect surgeries and have some of the highest complication rates of any surgery. For trans women, though—they have to get a neovagina before they can qualify. Double standard? Doesn’t matter; the science, unlike with trans men, has been perfected, that I think it’s reasonable to demand sterilization and the creation of a neovagina before allowing them to be deemed as “women” in the eyes of society and allowing them access to women’s-only spaces. Why? To protect other women, so that women aren’t raped or otherwise assaulted from crossdressers claiming they’re “trans”. So women can congregate with others for girls’ night out. Because men and women want to have those times where they are solely with other members of the same sex—if I was going to attend a night out on the town with the boys, I definitely would not want a female friend or one of their girlfriends joining us!

Should children and teenagers be allowed access to puberty blockers to help start their transition? If we lived in a world like our ancestors when 15 or 16 was often considered age of majority, I would agree. But because we infantilize people well into their 20s, I don’t think they have the ability most times to determine they are ready for a sex change. Young children know there’s some distinction between men and women, and some clearly show they are girls who want to be boys, or boys who want to be girls. (I was one of them!) Many “progressive” parents have become disillusioned by trans propaganda, that they now deem any version of gender variance as transgenderism. Kids and teenagers also don’t understand “gender” as leftists try to shove down our throats. I think anyone under 18 should not be allowed to access any kind of hormones, or even puberty blockers—sure, the stuff is mostly reversible, but these medicines were created for children with medical issues to correct, not meant for people who have otherwise healthy bodies to suppress puberty. Plus, the more we prescribe puberty blockers, that means less available for children with medical disorders who really do need them. Yes, this means they have to endure puberty, but if the gender dysphoria is that mentally challenging on them, that means they are nowhere of sound mind to decide to undergo surgery—they should be seeking a therapist to understand what they are going through, how to cope. There are binders for boys, and gaffs and bra-stuffers for girls. Help them socialize with other members of the opposite sex who don’t mind including them, to help them socialize. Let them dress accordingly; allow trans girls to shave, and trans boys not to shave. (Brothers, I knew plenty of guys who were teens who didn’t develop facial hair until well after graduation; you’ll be fine.) Educate the transsexual youth on what sex change involves when they are 18, and help them get an after-school job to start saving (with the internet, this has never been easier), and help them research employers who have health policies that cover HRT and SRS.

Should Medicaid, Medicare, military insurance, and other publicly-funded insurance programs cover trans healthcare? No. It’d too easy for transtrenders to say they’re “disabled” because of gender dysphoria, to then become welfare bums and demand everything be provided for them. The military is no place for people to decide they are instead members of the opposite sex—if they decide they are and want to, they should be medically discharged, live as private citizens while they undergo a sex change, and then re-enlist when they are healed and ready to go. If you are on Medicare because you’re elderly, why wait so long in life to decide then to change? If you’re disabled and on Medicare, how do you know it’s not because of another medical disorder that might be making you think you’re trans? Publicly funded assistance is provided for people with physical disabilities, not mental; I mean, if this was put to a referendum for the people to directly choose (and not because of politicians with an agenda), that’s one thing, but otherwise it shouldn’t be covered.

This might sound like I am writing from a place of privilege, but it’s not—I had to fight tooth and nail to become a man. I put off college, moving out, saving for retirement, investing in the stock market, gave up parenthood, and only God knows how many other milestones to become a man. I was, and still am, lucky that my insurance then and now covers my sex change needs, but I had to and still have to pay high premiums, copays, coinsurances, and other out-of-pocket costs to this day for my health needs. Life as a man is not easy, either. My car insurance, and many other costs tied to one’s sex, has gone up. Social expectations are harder; social perceptions are raised.

If we went to universal healthcare, no doubt I would think it’d be a great idea for them to cover sex change therapy, but it should be under the old standards of care, where there is a waiting list, you have to undergo psychiatric evaluation and the real-life test before they even begin to issue any kind of treatment. Until then, I don’t think our government (from an Amerocentric perspective, on our government; this doesn’t apply to any other world government) should mandate or ban coverage of transsexual medical needs, and leave it up to policy holders themselves as to whether or not they want to cover it—and if a trans person wants the insurance, they have the Internet to find out who does cover it.

Comments are closed, given how controversial my stance is, especially among other “trans” people.

%d bloggers like this: