ROGD (Rapid Onset Gender Dysphoria)


I will admit I get a lot of interesting information that comes from my readers. Some of it is worth replying to while others cause me to feel like Yahoo Serious. => Followed by the overwhelming concern of what the fuck did I just read? I am more than happy do look into “Ideas” of why I am the way I am. To be honest I want to know in fact it eats at me to not know.

So this came across my desk and I had to go digging. Quote this from my wisdom if you wish. Always be careful when digging for the truth you, may not like the monsters you find. Before we start talking about ROGD we need to talk a small bit about research and do it in a way that everyone can understand. When doing research on an idea you need to do it in a way that removes bias. Meaning that your personal opinions do not play a part in the outcome of your research. This is achieved by using a double-blind study.

“A double-blind study is one in which neither the participants nor the experimenters know who is receiving a particular treatment. This procedure is utilized to prevent bias in research results. Double-blind studies are particularly useful for preventing bias due to demand characteristics or the placebo effect.” (1)

This can also be used in the issues of Mental Health, Physical Health, and other sciences.

Now let us get into the meat of the post. ROGD (Rapid Onset Gender Dysphoria) which was coined by Dr. Lisa Littman. The writer of the Hypothesis that is ROGD.

“Hypothesis is an assumption that is made on the basis of some evidence. This is the initial point of any investigation that translates the research questions into a prediction. It includes components like variables, population and the relation between the variables. A research hypothesis is a hypothesis that is used to test the relationship between two or more variables.” (2) *Note* I encourage you to read the rules about creating a Hypothesis.

Now I am going to be fair and give Dr. Littman enough air time to link her study [Link]. I will remind you once again that following all research links that I supply are at your own risk when reading them. You should always keep in mind that YOU COME FIRST! That it is your responsibility to know when is when and walk away. Furthermore at no time is it your right to go on the attack. I supply you information for educational purposes only. I also give you the tools to answer questions that might come up.

I took the time to read her study and will call it a very sloppy hypothesis. That does not include a proper blind study. Furthermore her pool of parents were only gathered from known anti-transgender websites and groups. The children that were involved were predominantly natal-female (XX) (82.8%). Which skews the data as it is mainly looking at those with XX presumed chromosomal markers. Though no proper test was done to ensure that the chromosomal markers matched the presumed physical gender. Meaning that there could have been variations that were not identified. We also must understand that this pool while might have had some who were diagnosis of mental health issues (62.5%). None of them appear to have been properly diagnosed with Gender Dysphoria. Are you starting to see the problem here? The written study is very biased and we have not even talked about the demographics of the parent pool.

I can keep going on how bad this study was. But I think her peers have done a better job at shooting it down. A couple of her peers (Dr. Florence Ashley and Alexandre Baril, PhD wrote about her study said “This too is riddled with flaws.” (3) Even calling it right out as “Bad Science“. Then we have Tannehall who wrote “Littman’s abstract suffers from so many methodological flaws, logical errors, and unacknowledged biases that it fits firmly in the category of junk science.” (4)

I can go on and on digging in this hole. But at some point even I hit the WTF stage and walked away after reading the fifth article debunking her study and shattering her hypothesis. I just could not continue.

But the above leads to a disturbing trend that is currently on the rise around the world. That being of picking and choosing which science to believe in. Even when some of that science is not factual. This is caused by the dumbing down of the educational system. We have people believing in social media over properly done studies and research. We even are seeing researchers who are so heavily biased that they cannot even do research correctly. They are also trusting in the issue of the dumbing down of the educational system. Expecting that their flawed work will not get noticed. Which then drags down the overall education levels of those who trust in that research.

Dr. Littman did no favours to anyone in this study. The children who were part of it were most likely abused by the parents after the release of the study. I would be interested to know the current wellbeing of these children. As we do know that those who are Transgender youth are at great risk of self-harm and suicide. This study also gives ammunition to those who are anti-transgender for whatever reason. They feel some sense of bravado when using this as a reason for their hate. Even though when shown evidence that it is flawed.

I was thinking of putting this study in the research section. But due to its large amount of flaws I am not willing to have to give a warning before anyone reads it with evidence debunking it. I am writing about it due to the fact it is about Gender Dysphoria (which I have). But there is nothing in it but a waste of time reading it. I could not find anything in it that was substantial to even help someone.

(1) https://www.verywellmind.com/what-is-a-double-blind-study-2795103

(2) https://byjus.com/physics/hypothesis/

(3) https://medium.com/@florence.ashley/why-rapid-onset-gender-dysphoria-is-bad-science-f8d25ac40a96

(4) https://www.advocate.com/commentary/2018/2/20/rapid-onset-gender-dysphoria-biased-junk-science

P.S. I am coming up on another year of this site being here. I could sure use some help in finances to keep it up and running. Below is my Patreon. If you can find a few spare coins under the seats. Would you? Could you? Click on the…

Categories: 2021, Gender

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

%d bloggers like this: