Why do taxpayers fund transition surgery, but not de-transition surgery?

“Gender-Affirming Care Covered by MassHealth” describes taxpayer-funded surgical procedures for residents of Maskachusetts who are smart enough to refrain from working (or at least keep their hours to the minimum). MassHealth is the Science State’s version of Medicaid, so it is partially paid for by federal taxpayers and partially by working chumps within Maskachusetts.

As described in the GAS MNG, gender-affirming surgery refers to one or more reconstruction procedures that may be part of a multidisciplinary treatment plan involving medical, surgical, and BH interventions available for the treatment of gender dysphoria. GAS may be part of therapeutic treatment to better align physical characteristics to gender identity.

To complete the miracle of transformation, Maskachusetts hatefully demands that transitioners be at least 18:

(Florida and similar states are pilloried in the corporate media for their denial of gender affirming surgery for minors while Maskachusetts is celebrated for its acceptance of all elements of Rainbow Flagism. Yet the minimum age for genital surgery is apparently the same in both states, at least for those from households where nobody works.)

Bad news for patients like me: “Hair transplantation” is not covered (those suffering from thinning hair must work extra hours, pay taxes to fund Medicaid, and then buy a ticket to South Korea). Also buried in the “Non-Covered Surgeries and Treatments” section:

Reversal of previous GAS [gender affirming surgery]

How can this be? If a patient experiences gender dysphoria and Science has proven that the correct treatment is surgical transition to a different gender, why wouldn’t reversal, which is a similar gender transition, also be covered? The explanation is thin:

As explained in MassHealth’s Guidelines for Medical Necessity Determination for Gender Affirming Surgery, MassHealth has determined that certain procedures and surgeries are either not medically necessary or lack sufficient medical evidence to support their use as treatment for gender dysphoria.

Let’s check those guidelines… there is no explanation of why reversal isn’t covered. The document simply states that “certain procedures and surgeries are not medically necessary for the treatment of gender dysphoria”. You we are informed by the New York Times that if you have gender dysphoria you need surgery, i.e., it is medically necessary.

It looks as though one legislator in Florida is trying to force employers to cover procedures symmetrically. SB 952 says if the employer pays for A-to-B transition it must also pay for B-back-to-A transition. However, it appears as though the bill did not attract any co-sponsors.

And, from 2019, without attracting much attention, Bud Light’s rainbow-themed packaging:

Press release excerpts:

“Bud Light has been a supporter of the LGBTQ+ community since the 80s and we are excited to continue our long-standing partnership with GLAAD by collaborating with them on this new commemorative bottle that celebrates the LGBTQ+ community and everything GLAAD does to support it,” said Andy Goeler, Vice President of Marketing for Bud Light. “The way we see it, our beer is for everyone to enjoy, so we are looking forward to seeing Pride bottles at bars throughout the month of June and beyond. With the release of these new bottles, we hope to create something that everyone can feel proud to hold during Pride month that also makes a positive impact for GLAAD’s initiatives and the LGBTQ+ community overall.”

“For twenty consecutive years, Bud Light has partnered with GLAAD in its mission to accelerate acceptance of LGBTQ people,” said Zeke Stokes, GLAAD Chief Programs Officer. “Bud Light stood with the community at a time when many brands did not, and their continued outspoken support sets the bar for other global brands.”

3 thoughts on “Why do taxpayers fund transition surgery, but not de-transition surgery?

  1. Don’t know why anyone would want to turn back into a human after turning into a lion.

  2. 2019 was relatively innocent compared to the militant policies we see now. I just laughed at ads like the one on display. After the cancel waves of 2020 I learned that they are actually serious.

    As for free transitioning vs de-transitioning: It should always be easy to join a religion, but hard to leave it.

  3. Surgeons are good at cutting things off, but putting organs back on? maybe in a transplant situation, but in this case all the scars will be healed. Essentially there is no going back.

Comments are closed.