RT @awkwardlefty_cj: @wesyang @gnrosenberg @benwritesthings Well there's your problem; you don't seem to understand that these ladies' "res…
@1sad0n3 @ChoooCole @BillboardChris Not all of them were but whatever here are others https://t.co/AoKJ6OtU2T https://t.co/OoOrCrD5Cp https://t.co/ti5EfpBMil
@RealPirate4 @IvanovVolkov Since you’re calling it a trend, I’m assuming you’re basing this on the Littman ROGD study. That study was extremely flawed and not taken seriously in the scientific community https://t.co/5nYjT7Ca9b
@f_frieza @salanaland @SunnyMarmalaid @theserfstv You need peer review to tell you why formulating a theory based on the parents of trans kids who browse anti-trans websites isn't scientifically rigorous? Okay, here you go then: https://t.co/JtT4IHPm4E ht
@BrianINVAAT En l'occurrence, c'est notamment le fait que l'étude interrogeait des parents qui était pointait du doigt, alors même que ceux-ci ont de bonnes chances de ne pas avoir une bonne idée de ce qu'il se passe dans la tête des jeunes. https://t.co/r
Currently, the person testifying identified as a member of Parents Against ROGD (rapid onset gender dysphoria). That term isn't real. It's been thoroughly debunked. https://t.co/qwcSd3WqKV
@meganphelps Hi @meganphelps, May I ask - did the question ‘why did you use discredited research from a deeply flawed study in order to make false claims about transgenderism?’ come up? https://t.co/k9inRvQxqF
@LeorSapir @trepetlikaA I've acknowledged the valid criticisms in Turban's study. However, I hope you're not presenting a view that ROGD is settled science. In my view, Dr. Littman provides a weak defense to Restar: https://t.co/1VLSZvFIOy
@teireeni @PekkarinenElina Tarja, nimenomaan rogd-teorialle ei ole löytynyt tutkimuksista todisteita. Se perustui Lisa Littmanin ”tutkimukseen”, jossa haastateltiin vain sp-dysforiaa kokevien nuorten vanhempia. https://t.co/u36m0QTjpM 1/2
@BobbyTilton @nytimes Multiple studies that find no evidence for it is a good start. https://t.co/uIMgMPHux3 https://t.co/t8Niyk0rSi
RT @krakeryn: @KyleReese102 @ZephyrBluePaddy @natachakennedy Hey, I found one more! This one points out how the rapid onset gender dysphor…
@KyleReese102 @ZephyrBluePaddy @natachakennedy Hey, I found one more! This one points out how the rapid onset gender dysphoria paper was wildly flawed and deeply unscientific https://t.co/vxeyoFvU7b
@polphiloecon @WhatTheTrans also it relies on the littman study, which again, is bullshit https://t.co/DD6ZNv5Vnh
@QueensSpeechUK @JBlackstarcat @WackyPidgeon @MatthewOHerren1 it wasn't just the trans community who denounced it https://t.co/5nYjT7Ca9b
5/ Interessant ist aber vielmehr wie sieht denn die Wissenschaft das Phänomen ROGD? @Dr_ArjeeRestar kritisiert hier https://t.co/EvkrFTmz8k die Methodik dezidiert. Sie schreibt "study design and data
@jk_rowling The problem is, @jk_rowling, even when we refute your concerns with evidence, you still make the same old unsupported claims. You keep citing Littman’s 2018 study, for example, despite the fact that it has been unambiguously discredited: http
@jordanbpeterson Why don’t you ever respond to substantive criticism? Here’s one: You often cite Littman’s research on RO Gender Dysphoria, despite its truly glaring flaws (see below). There. No ad hominem. No insults. Just critique. Why do you keep run
@HaruruChanDesu Not true. The study was flawed in multiple ways, it only polled parents from transphobic websites and used the made up term 'gender confusion' instead of dysphoria to perscribe transexualism. Full debunking can be read here https://t.co/0RL
@RaltusMC @JkJuuung @iesamina @kilgefin @ejrosetta DW 1.1) The study, which used recruited the parents of trans people sourced from 3 prominent anti-trans websites, also found that 76.5% of the parents surveyed rejected the fact that their children were tr
@StijnOerde @LGBwiththeT That "study" is done by a single person who is infamous for poor study practices, such as basing perceptions of "Rapid Onset Gender Dysmorphia" by surveying only parents on websites who already believed such a thing occurred, creat
RT @ErinInTheMorn: Gillian Bransetter from the ACLU calls out the authors of this article for doing exactly what I'm talking about here...…
RT @GBBranstetter: This question has been researched into the dirt 2020 https://t.co/PMNIoKcCmh 2021 https://t.co/mohTPJ9PEF 2022 https:…
@Gold_Dragon4 @jordanbpeterson @elonmusk Happy to @Gold_Dragon4 😊 Peterson regularly cites Littman’s 2018 study as evidence of ‘Rapid Onset Gender Dysphoria’, despite the fact that it is an embarrassing piece of hack science, laden with countless, basic m
@lizmo777 @jordanbpeterson @elonmusk Yes, he does. Proof below 😊 Peterson regularly cites Littman’s 2018 study as evidence of ‘Rapid Onset Gender Dysphoria’, despite the fact that it is an embarrassing piece of hack science, laden with countless, basic me
@ZaiStoic @jordanbpeterson @elonmusk Hi @ZaiStoic. Happy to. 😊 Peterson regularly cites Littman’s 2018 study as evidence of ‘Rapid Onset Gender Dysphoria’, despite the fact that it is an embarrassing piece of hack science, laden with countless, basic meth
RT @ErinInTheMorn: Gillian Bransetter from the ACLU calls out the authors of this article for doing exactly what I'm talking about here...…
RT @GBBranstetter: This question has been researched into the dirt 2020 https://t.co/PMNIoKcCmh 2021 https://t.co/mohTPJ9PEF 2022 https:…
RT @ErinInTheMorn: Gillian Bransetter from the ACLU calls out the authors of this article for doing exactly what I'm talking about here...…
RT @GBBranstetter: This question has been researched into the dirt 2020 https://t.co/PMNIoKcCmh 2021 https://t.co/mohTPJ9PEF 2022 https:…
RT @GBBranstetter: This question has been researched into the dirt 2020 https://t.co/PMNIoKcCmh 2021 https://t.co/mohTPJ9PEF 2022 https:…
RT @GBBranstetter: This question has been researched into the dirt 2020 https://t.co/PMNIoKcCmh 2021 https://t.co/mohTPJ9PEF 2022 https:…
RT @GBBranstetter: This question has been researched into the dirt 2020 https://t.co/PMNIoKcCmh 2021 https://t.co/mohTPJ9PEF 2022 https:…
RT @ErinInTheMorn: Gillian Bransetter from the ACLU calls out the authors of this article for doing exactly what I'm talking about here...…
RT @ErinInTheMorn: Gillian Bransetter from the ACLU calls out the authors of this article for doing exactly what I'm talking about here...…
RT @ErinInTheMorn: Gillian Bransetter from the ACLU calls out the authors of this article for doing exactly what I'm talking about here...…
RT @ErinInTheMorn: Gillian Bransetter from the ACLU calls out the authors of this article for doing exactly what I'm talking about here...…
RT @GBBranstetter: This question has been researched into the dirt 2020 https://t.co/PMNIoKcCmh 2021 https://t.co/mohTPJ9PEF 2022 https:…
@jburgo55 @GorinMoti More research: https://t.co/E1KvUf1K3b
RT @ErinInTheMorn: Gillian Bransetter from the ACLU calls out the authors of this article for doing exactly what I'm talking about here...…
RT @GBBranstetter: This question has been researched into the dirt 2020 https://t.co/PMNIoKcCmh 2021 https://t.co/mohTPJ9PEF 2022 https:…
RT @GBBranstetter: This question has been researched into the dirt 2020 https://t.co/PMNIoKcCmh 2021 https://t.co/mohTPJ9PEF 2022 https:…
RT @GBBranstetter: This question has been researched into the dirt 2020 https://t.co/PMNIoKcCmh 2021 https://t.co/mohTPJ9PEF 2022 https:…
RT @ErinInTheMorn: Gillian Bransetter from the ACLU calls out the authors of this article for doing exactly what I'm talking about here...…
RT @ErinInTheMorn: Gillian Bransetter from the ACLU calls out the authors of this article for doing exactly what I'm talking about here...…
RT @ErinInTheMorn: Gillian Bransetter from the ACLU calls out the authors of this article for doing exactly what I'm talking about here...…
RT @GBBranstetter: This question has been researched into the dirt 2020 https://t.co/PMNIoKcCmh 2021 https://t.co/mohTPJ9PEF 2022 https:…
RT @GBBranstetter: This question has been researched into the dirt 2020 https://t.co/PMNIoKcCmh 2021 https://t.co/mohTPJ9PEF 2022 https:…
RT @ErinInTheMorn: Gillian Bransetter from the ACLU calls out the authors of this article for doing exactly what I'm talking about here...…
RT @ErinInTheMorn: Gillian Bransetter from the ACLU calls out the authors of this article for doing exactly what I'm talking about here...…
RT @GBBranstetter: This question has been researched into the dirt 2020 https://t.co/PMNIoKcCmh 2021 https://t.co/mohTPJ9PEF 2022 https:…
RT @ErinInTheMorn: Gillian Bransetter from the ACLU calls out the authors of this article for doing exactly what I'm talking about here...…
RT @ErinInTheMorn: Gillian Bransetter from the ACLU calls out the authors of this article for doing exactly what I'm talking about here...…
RT @GBBranstetter: This question has been researched into the dirt 2020 https://t.co/PMNIoKcCmh 2021 https://t.co/mohTPJ9PEF 2022 https:…
RT @GBBranstetter: This question has been researched into the dirt 2020 https://t.co/PMNIoKcCmh 2021 https://t.co/mohTPJ9PEF 2022 https:…
Gillian Bransetter from the ACLU calls out the authors of this article for doing exactly what I'm talking about here... not including the research that has come out since 2019 that directly contradicts the premise of their article: https://t.co/vmvr0O8TFl
@alexinsequence @BidenRegime1984 @SarahLynnRober2 @Reuters @specialreports You're lying, and didn't read the studies. https://t.co/obcGL7bP76
RT @GBBranstetter: This question has been researched into the dirt 2020 https://t.co/PMNIoKcCmh 2021 https://t.co/mohTPJ9PEF 2022 https:…
RT @GBBranstetter: This question has been researched into the dirt 2020 https://t.co/PMNIoKcCmh 2021 https://t.co/mohTPJ9PEF 2022 https:…
RT @GBBranstetter: This question has been researched into the dirt 2020 https://t.co/PMNIoKcCmh 2021 https://t.co/mohTPJ9PEF 2022 https:…
@Reuters @specialreports reckless journalism. where’s your ethics team lmfao
RT @GBBranstetter: This question has been researched into the dirt 2020 https://t.co/PMNIoKcCmh 2021 https://t.co/mohTPJ9PEF 2022 https:…
RT @GBBranstetter: This question has been researched into the dirt 2020 https://t.co/PMNIoKcCmh 2021 https://t.co/mohTPJ9PEF 2022 https:…
RT @GBBranstetter: This question has been researched into the dirt 2020 https://t.co/PMNIoKcCmh 2021 https://t.co/mohTPJ9PEF 2022 https:…
RT @GBBranstetter: This question has been researched into the dirt 2020 https://t.co/PMNIoKcCmh 2021 https://t.co/mohTPJ9PEF 2022 https:…
RT @GBBranstetter: This question has been researched into the dirt 2020 https://t.co/PMNIoKcCmh 2021 https://t.co/mohTPJ9PEF 2022 https:…
RT @GBBranstetter: This question has been researched into the dirt 2020 https://t.co/PMNIoKcCmh 2021 https://t.co/mohTPJ9PEF 2022 https:…
Anyway there are actual peer reviewed studies funded by reputable clinicians that this report just does not touch! https://t.co/0Iy0n4CQcA
This question has been researched into the dirt 2020 https://t.co/PMNIoKcCmh 2021 https://t.co/mohTPJ9PEF 2022 https://t.co/lioQ7WIWLH
@SlenderSkeptic @delflickmaestro @MavenOfMayhem The "kids being tricked" social contagion based ROGD theory is another piece of GC ideology posing as science. https://t.co/3wBluDJgEj
@woke_capitalist which I think is enough--the original study has been corrected practically into nonexistence and the relevant authorities have all said not to use this as a diagnosis but there's also this extensive critique https://t.co/dsWnhJQ1Fh
@devonlass @ZJemptv That’s your prerogative. But her peers don’t share your faith: https://t.co/FqnYWkdOki
@Ragooreturns No. As in, she has been scientifically critiqued and the study has been discarded as poor science. That is how science works. https://t.co/XnJVOpJHp6
@BeeInNorthAZ @HJoyceGender A huge swathe of her argument is based on debunked trash science. (A study torn apart by said scientist's own colleagues.) https://t.co/XnJVOpKfeE https://t.co/usYw0YTF11
@KelRad Aquí está (perdón por autocitarme) ⤵️ https://t.co/ehPdIiHcOs
@christopher_981 @SkyAveStep @Terps859 @lulusthename @francesbarber13 Social contagion has been debunked, completely. Littman's methodology was hugely flawed, and has been criticised by her own colleagues and hundreds of medical professionals. https://t.co
@tpwk47 @longue_carabine @Approximation_1 @JeremyTate41 That the data used to create the concept was highly flawed. https://t.co/ck0RbXBgdj
@Dexascam @soundpoet @HJoyceGender Littman's research has been torn to shreds by her own colleagues and has been debunked. https://t.co/XnJVOpKfeE
@JoeTraherne1 @PomeranianGod ROGD does not exist. Real life data does not match https://t.co/8mnxQ83fFS what Littman's internet poll (that explicitly allowed people to resubmit as many times as they wanted & have it count as new & different answer
@ButNotTheCity An amazing piece, especially in adding nuance to the poor research design behind the 2019 Littman paper that attempted to put ROGD on the map. I can always support academic freedom, but rigor in clinical research design and implementation is
@urisan_san @Ferpdelrio @Amanda_DGIR @LaEtxebarria @Agenda2030_ @dra_manar Pero no hay problema. En Google Scholar es fácil de encontrar artículos científicos como estos ⤵️ https://t.co/s2uGrV75Yr https://t.co/Z9JhACqHQf
@epa_nit @MayaMitKind @matahari_etc @yannickshetty @el_nagashi https://t.co/gVBHZ8zvOY Kritik an der Studie kann man mitnichten als "TRA-Aufschrei" abtun.
@ClassiestBuu21 @phil_little @OhhhNoItsJames1 @sarahtheeggyet1 @IndiaWilloughby @jk_rowling pretty questionable methods (https://t.co/nt31Kid3UL, https://t.co/VAvt32bRtt), such as recruiting participants from anti-trans websites. "ROGD" is a recent example
@lostfem80 @125dew @Jac061272 @JaneCaro @danfromsydney @trophywife43 @salltweets @leoniebc @RhettsRevival Methodological Critique of Littman’s (2018) Parental-Respondents Accounts of “Rapid-Onset Gender Dysphoria” https://t.co/IeBkFjOSF3
@alles_sophie https://t.co/gVBHZ8yXZq Jupp. Wichtige kritik
RT @DadTrans: Methodological Critique of Littman’s (2018) Parental-Respondents Accounts of “Rapid-Onset Gender Dysphoria”. Archives of Sexu…
@trollqueen19 @fubuker @BadMedicalTakes I'm afraid it's nonsense. He's discussing Litmann's paper on social contagion. https://t.co/P9bh0Fbafs Which has been comprehensively debunked as that link describes (Popular science websites are NOT authoritative
@ScenicCityDem @TheBonniePrince @jack_turban @HighlandFox @HJoyceGender Citation? And I wasn't actually talking about his paper https://t.co/4JggSqrXzS
@emethias @WhoKnowsAnymre @nancyGo51241092 @NeuroSGS @BobbyCesspool2 Since it being "recent" is apparently bad for some reason, here's some less recent work too (https://t.co/RygJxx0xMd, https://t.co/phSGGzCIco, https://t.co/oyzDAppoty).
@dilanesper @ChronicBabak @jessesingal You obviously didn't read the article I linked before, so here it is again. I'm not going to waste any more time arguing with someone who studied how to argue with judges. I studied how to conduct accurate social scie