Transphobia and Mental Health Misinformation Not Allowed 

Clear and based. Thank you.

Something I encourage of everyone, on this issue, or any other issue, and just in general, is to read (not just listen to, but to read) directly from sources from across the ideological spectrum on that issue, and then use one's critical thinking skills to analyze the sources, the citations, and the content, and then decide for oneself. Many people nowadays think it's desirable to be "open-minded." But what does that mean? Does it mean to adopt every new idea that comes along? Surely not, because new ideas come along every day that are not worthy of adoption. Here's what I've come to believe is a useful definition of "being open-minded": it's a willingness to *read directly from sources from across the ideological spectrum, and to then use one's critical thinking skills to decide for oneself.* The value of this approach to open-mindedness is that 1. it allows us to keep reading diverse views and new ideas from across the ideological spectrum 2. but it protects us from adopting problematic ideas by a. reading what the critics of the various ideas have to say from all sides of an issue b. using our critical thinking skills to analyze and decide for ourselves. In this way, we can be open to and learn from continuing to access diverse perspectives (especially on a fast-developing issue such as gender identity ideology), while taking precautions by reading what critics on all sides have to say on the issue. I believe this is necessary to make the most informed, best-reasoned decisions on this or any other issue. Refusing to read other points of view may be comfortable, but we can loose out on important ideas and information that one side or another doesn't want us to know about. At first, it can be uncomfortable to read on an issue from people we disagree with. But after doing this for awhile, pretty soon it gets easier to read differing viewpoints. That's because, I find, I start feeling more detached from any one point of view, and find value from useful information and ideas from people with different viewpoints than my own. So I find that the more widely I read, the fewer negatives I experience with reading contrary views, and the more positives I experience when doing so. I now probably read as much from people I disagree with on this issue as those I agree with. In fact, that's why I clicked the link to your video, when I saw its title. I enjoy reading views different than my own.

Not sure why this is in my recommendations, but the question I have, working in the insurance field, is if there is no mental health disorder associated with being trans, then on what basis are gender-affirming care providers supposed to bill insurance providers for surgeries, hormones, psychotherapy, etc.? If there is no diagnosis, I don't see a basis for any of the treatment being anything other than elective. Just setting stigma aside for a moment, isn't it a bit odd for a group of people to simultaneously claim that they have no diagnosable disorder, yet somehow insurance companies still need to pay for their badly-needed care? Could you help me make sense of that? Thanks.

I often see people argue that the rise in trans men in proportion to trans women is a sign of social contagion. Can you make a video on that? It would be valuable to have your take on it. Thanks

Go off queen!