BE ASVISED: THIS ARTICLE WILL INCLUDE EXPLICIT DESCRIPTIONS OF CONVERSION PRACTICES, SEXUAL ASSAULT, AND GATEKEEPING OF TRANS HEALTHCARE
This is a story that is going to be incredibly difficult for me to tell, but it needs to be told, in full and not as snippets on my social media. I strongly believe that myself, and many others, have experienced conversion practices at the hands of the Danish government through the institutes Sexologisk Klinik (SK) and Centeret For Kønsidentitet (CKI) in the process of me attempting to access legal pathways to transition. I also believe that the replacement youth transition service Kompetencecenter for Kønsidentitet hos Børn og Unge (KKBU) is continuing these harmful practices in place of Sexologisk Kilink. I know I am not the only person to have experienced these conversion practices as I have talked to multiple people who went through the same systems as I did and who have similar stories to me. To respect the privacy of these people as they are victims just as much as I am I will only be telling my story and the experiences I had at the hands of these institutions. I will be maintaining this article as a living document, and if anyone wishes to add their experiences to this document feel free to contact me via my DMs on Bluesky.
This article will be an auto-ethnographic article structured as a series of events, sorted by institution, that I experienced as I pursued transition related healthcare from the Danish public healthcare system. Each event will be coupled with an explanation as to why I believe the event in question aligns with how conversion practices are performed. I will then be using the events and their corollary practices in conversion “therapy” to argue that the Danish government is participating in subjecting trans people in Denmark to conversion practices through the Danish public healthcare system. Any added ethnographical stories/events other than my own will be incorporated into the appropriate sections and clearly demarcated, then analysed with the same lens as my own events.
To a lot of people the conventional understanding of conversion practices are physically violent, religiously motivated and take place in religious institution or in private homes of either the practitioners or the families of the the victims. It is also commonly understood that these practices are primarily initiated and facilitated by the families of the victims. This form of abuse through conversion practices is very much real and does affect an uncountable number of trans people, especially trans youths.1 Their stories deserve to be told and we need to push back against their oppression as it causes incredible amounts of harm. However due to the nature of us only understanding conversion practices as this religious and familial abuse we can miss other ways that conversion practices are performed by institutions such as the state and hospitals. This epistemic void in the public consciousness needs to be filled, if it is allowed to remain it will only fester more harm for trans people.
Trans people can and do also have this epistemic void within their understanding of what constitutes conversion practices. This is because we do not have adequate representation of conversion practices in common parlance and media, effectively preventing us from fully developing a narrative that encompasses the experiences we have gone through. With this in mind I believe Harvey Milk’s speeches and the proposition he puts forth about how living out and proud being what changes the everyday narratives that dictate our lives through giving people a counter-representation to mainstream narratives surrounding queer people2 is incredibly important to consider. It is because there is such a deep seated need for representation that I am choosing to tell my story. My goal with writing this is to put to words and publish a piece that allows for others who have been through similar experiences as me to recognise their experiences for what they are, and to have the language to talk about their experiences. This decision comes after the release of Abigail Thorn’s work on the history of conversion practices, and investigation of the NHS and the conversion practices that take place within the institution3, which is what gave me the moment of recognition with what I went through as someone who was seeking transition related healthcare in Denmark.
I am going to be utilising the terminology that Abigail Thorn does in her video on conversion practices in the United Kingdom, as I find the vocabulary she establishes to be incredibly accurate and clear. The core of this choice in vocabulary centres around the preference for the term “practices” over “therapy” as therapy holds the implication that it is a form of psychological/psychological care, when in reality it is a pseudoscientific practice that does not provide tangible care to those it “treats”; rather it has been show to harm people who go through these practices. It is precisely because of this that I am working with the term “conversion practices” as I feel that the term is more empathetic to the experiences of the victims of the individuals who are put through the practices. To establish a working definition of conversion practices I will be drawing from Abigail Thorn again, as well as taking into account descriptions of “conversion therapy” as established by other organisations and writers. This will establish a baseline understanding of what these practices entail. I will then be using this baseline understanding as a tool to construct a narrative based off the ethnographical stories that are told in this article.
Thorne’s documentary on conversion therapy cites the Memorandum of understanding on conversion therapy in the UK, the citation is as follows:
For the purposes of this document ’conversion therapy’ is an umbrella term for a therapeutic approach, or any model or individual viewpoint that demonstrates an assumption that any sexual orientation or gender identity is inherently preferable to any other, and which attempts to bring about a change of sexual orientation or gender identity, or seeks to suppress an individual’s expression of sexual orientation or gender identity on that basis.”4
Here we see that conversion therapy is very concisely surmised as the therapeutic approach that seeks to supress an individual’s sexual orientation or gender identity. This aligns with what other organisations such as the Human Rights Commission.
So-called “conversion therapy,” sometimes known as “reparative therapy,” is a range of dangerous and discredited practices that falsely claim to change a person’s sexual orientation or gender identity or expression. 5
Here we again see that the point of conversion practices are described as an attempt to supress gender identity and sexual identity. I will therefore be describing conversion practices as such.
Of note however is the usage of the word “assumption” in the Memorandum of understanding. This and other words such as “intent” in other descriptions of conversion practices are something that Thorn brings up in her documentary. Thorn describes this specific phrasing implies an assumption that there is an intent to supress the lived reality of the queer individual who is subject to the practices. This specific epistemological framing however elides how individuals who participate in trans care at specific government institutions can perpetuate the harmful practices despite not having the intent to engage in conversion practices. This is an incredibly important point as it is the crux of understanding how conversion practices are undertaken at an institutional scale. I personally liken this phenomenon to the the banality of evil as described by Hannah Ardent in her book Eichmann in Jerusalem. Normal people who do not have the intent to engage in harm against queer people participate in perpetuating it by following guidelines and “just doing their job” as the institution they are a part of outlines they should. Because of this it is also entirely possible for people to perpetuate harm against queer individuals, even if they believe they are helping them, as the institutions they are part of are fundamentally cantered around supressing queerness in some manner.
Finally, there is the fact that conversion practices are built upon incredibly harmful practices, with Patrick Corrigan from Amnesty International UK describing it as such;
So-called conversion ‘therapy’ can constitute torture or cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment…”6
It is important to keep this in mind when discussing conversion practices, as it allows us to examine the outcomes and effects of the treatment that trans individuals experience in relation to gender services. This means we have to take into consideration the experiences of the individual who is subject to the treatment at these institutions. Do they consider the treatment they experience to be cruel, inhuman, or degrading
When I first started seeking transition related healthcare from the state I was initially referred to the department at Rigshospitalet called “Sexologisk Klinik (SK)” that would treat trans patients of all ages alongside overseeing the treatment and chemical castration of paedophiles,7 today SK no longer treats trans patients, adult trans care now takes place at “Centeret for Kønsidentitet (CKI)”8 (and others) and youth care takes place at “Kompetencecenter for Kønsidentitet hos Børn og Unge (KKBU)”.9 I will be beginning my story by talking about my experiences at SK as despite them no longer treating trans patients, their work is firmly within living memory and there are people who experienced conversion practices there who deserve recognition for what they went through.
I mentioned earlier that SK treated trans people as well as paedophiles, this is important context because as I was sitting in the waiting room for the first appointment for my care, across from me was a poster outlining how paedophiles will be treated by the department. I don’t remember there being any information on trans healthcare. As soon as I was sat in the office with the sexologist in charge of my care I was asked my first question; “Are you here because you are a paedophile, or are you here because you are trans?” This question as well as the posters that are on display in the waiting room set a precedent, trans people are sexual deviants on par with paedophiles. Trans patients were made to feel ashamed and disgusted by their existence at SK, and this was before we were even judged worthy of receiving hormone replacement therapy. This shame that was pushed upon trans people by the medical professionals at SK is very closely aligned with one one of the tools of conversion practices.10 By making a trans person feel ashamed of their trans-ness it becomes easier to manipulate them into either avoiding transition or de-transitioning. This shaming process is similar to the ways that gay people are made to feel shame through conversion practices for their same-sex attraction and open the doors for manipulation that leads to them avoiding same-sex relationships.
My treatment at SK continued this trend of making me feel ashamed for my existence as a trans person. However alongside the shame I felt I was also pushed into traumatic situations that I have still not fully processed the effects of to this date. An example of the traumatic experiences I was subject to was the sexologist requiring I explain to him every single detail of how I masturbated, short of him forcing me to strip in front of him and demonstrate. He demanded to know how regularly I would masturbate, what I would wear, think of, if I touched my penis, utilised anal stimulation, felt ashamed afterwards and more. I would also be repeatedly asked to talk about if I was sexually assaulted as a child, and if so to describe what happened. These two lines of questioning are undeniably sexual harassment, and arguably sexual assault. Sexual harassment and assault are commonplace in conversion practices,11 and are there to create a negative association within the subject of the conversion practices and what the practitioners are trying to prevent. Whilst I was not physically sexually assaulted by the doctor at the clinic, I was still subject to sexual harassment/assault by them. I also believe that the purpose for this sexual harassment/assault at SK was simultaneously there to dissuade trans people from continuing to pursue hormones by making the process as excruciating as possible as pursuing transition meant returning to be sexually harassed/assaulted. And as is known, the purpose of conversion practices for trans people is to dissuade them from transitioning by any means possible.
I did not manage to receive any actual transition related care from SK, as during my time there I was to be migrated from their care to the newly minted institute Centeret for Kønsidentitet. I say “to be migrated” as SK failed to transfer my files over to CKI before deleting them, forcing me to start over again in pursuing transition related care from the Danish public healthcare service. It is unclear if this failure was a deliberate action or an accident, and I was not informed of this change in care provider, I only found out that this happened by calling SK and CKI in an attempt to figure out why I did not receive my next appointment from SK. Though not as immediately prevalent or as intense as the two other events I have described in this section, the failure from SK to transfer my files to CKI broadly aligns with the conversion practice of denying trans people access to the care they need, as a trans person who desires transition cannot transition without transition related care i.e. hormones.
It is common knowledge amongst trans people in Denmark that SK would also regularly deny you care if they did not think you adequately fit the diagnostic criteria for gender dysphoria as decided by the sexologist or clinitian assigned to your case and a panel of people who never meet you, or if the sexologist had any other potential explanations for why you were seeking transition related care. I strongly believe this is another reason why the sexologist assigned to my case kept pushing me to talk about my masturbation habits and the details of ant potential experiences of sexual assault I could have had. It is my firmly held belief that he was looking to categorise me as AGP, or to find an other extant reason for me to pursue transition that wasn’t dysphoria and deny me care on that basis.
CKI as an institution was created as a response to the removal of gender dysphoria from the International Classification of Disease (ICD) and subsequent declassification of dysphoria as a psychiatric illness in Denmark. CKI took over the care of trans adults from SK, this meant there was no longer as much of an atmosphere of shame that surrounded trans people as trans people seeking trans care were no longer likened to paedophiles. The removal of this element of shame however, does not mean that trans people were no longer being subject to conversion practices.
My time at CKI included a similar line of questioning to that at SK. I was asked to give details on my masturbation habits, though this time they would respect my no and not push the topic again in the session. They would however ask again in future sessions. On top of this I was asked if I top or bottom when having sex. I don’t think it in necessary to go into depth as to how this specific line of questioning and how often they would ask counts as sexual harassment/assault, especially when you consider that they held institutional power over me through being the ones who controlled my access to hormones, because demanding that information from someone in such a persistent manner is undeniably sexual harassment/assault, even if it dressed up in a softer environ and with the airs of respecting consent, it was still coercive in nature. As I outline earlier, sexual harassment and assault are tools of conversion practices. I don’t believe the explicit purpose of this line of questioning was to harass/assault me, rather I believe it was to examine if I had any dysphoria relating to masturbation. However, intent is not the only thing that counts, the purpose of a machine is what it does.
During my time at CKI I was subject to a few specific questions. The first of these questions that I would like to bring up is how one day, as I was leaving the room, the person overseeing my case asked me; “do you think your autism has anything to do with your desire to transition?” I do not have an autism diagnosis, being autistic is seen as a valid reason to deny hormone care in Denmark. I was also asked about if I was depressed/dealing with any other mental health issues, what my sexual orientation is, etc etc. Although a lot of these questions seem innocuous I find that they serve a similar process to the intense questioning that I experienced at SK vis a vis my sexuality and why I was pursuing transition. That is, these questions being a precursor to find anything that could be used to deny me the agency I desired from my transition. These practices surrounding intensive explorations of if the person is really trans enough to access transition are still ongoing at CKI at time of writing.
When talking about my time at CKI it is also important to bring up what happened after I managed to make my way through the gatekeeping and conversion practices to finally be able to access the care I needed. There was a brief period of time where CKI did not have the resources to administer hormone care, and so that care would be done through the Gynaecological Institute at Rigshospitalet. It was here where I experienced such an extreme case of medical abuse that it permanently ruined my trust in the medical system. After having made my way through the gruelling process to aces care, I was told that it would be impossible for me to receive hormone therapy due to the fact that I had every marker for a tumour in my brain that was most likely cancer. I was told this based on the preliminary bloodwork I was given to determine my hormone care and nothing else.
At the age of 19 I received a bogus cancer diagnosis in an attempt to deny me care. Two years after I first began to seek transition related care. Luckily I was already on hormones at this time, since I had managed to find myself a source of DIY HRT that let me transition on my own. In the process of panicking about my brain tumour and how I would have to go through intensive treatment, and maybe even surgery, I completely forgot that it was effectively a tool to deny and delay me HRT. But that was what it was.
I went back and looked at my blood results now that I have the knowledge needed to read them, and there was nothing to be concerned about other than an elevated (to less than cis female, but higher than cis male) levels of prolactin, something that was much more likely to be described by the intersex condition I have. My prolactin levels were not enough of an indicator to create this diagnosis, one that delayed my care. Giving a trans person a false cancer diagnosis to delay care is unquestionably evil no matter how one looks at it. And it is an extension of the systemic structure of how trans healthcare is handled in Denmark. This being the core motivation to restrict who can access transition, limiting it to only those trans people who are deemed acceptable within the eyes of cissexist society. Limiting trans healthcare in such a violent and systemic manners is undeniably a symptom of conversion practices, and an attempt to dissuade trans people from transitioning, forcing them back into the sole ascribed to them by the heterosexual regime.
I do not have personal experience with KKBU, and as of the time of writing I have yet to gain any insight into the exact internal mechanisms that take place within KKBU, if you have any experiences here please feel free to contact me. Due to this lack of first hand experience I cannot with 100% certainty talk about the ways that KKBU continues the potential conversion practices that are present in CKI and were present in SK. My current position is based entirely on extrapolating from the ways that SK and CKI treat trans patients, and the institutional structures that encourage the extractive and gatekeeping based treatment that is standard care. Because of this I will not be making any precise comments as to the nature of care that the children at KKBU are subject to. However, I will stand firm in my belief that trans youth are subject to treatment that is beholden to the same practices that are present in CKI and SK. This is because KKBU is built up under the same ideological basis that has informed all previous trans healthcare. On top of this, we need to consider the power dynamics of the relationship between KKBU and their trans patients.
Up until now, everything I have talked about in this article regarding how conversion practices are implemented in Denmark by making comparisons to anti-gay conversion practices, and the typical depictions of conversion practices as either preventative or restrictive practices that attempt to restrict the amount of trans people who transition. This is primarily because it is easier to understand conversion practices as a process that aims to change the psychological profile of an individual to the point where they no longer desire transition. By aligning my analysis to this framework I limit myself to describing the experiences of trans people to metonymic comparisons with sexuality based conversion practices. Because of this I will briefly be talking about a unique form of conversion practices that are experienced by trans people, this being the perpetuation of inadequate levels of care.
Within the fringes of online trans spaces such as the /lgbt/ board on 4chan, the phrase “hondosing” was developed. The term was coined to described incredibly low and ineffective doses of hormones that do not manage to alter the body of the the trans individual to a significant degree, leaving them as “hons”. Whilst incredibly crass and designed to be used to insult, as much of the terminology that derives from self deprecating spheres is, these two words “hon” and “hondosing” begin to illuminate a common experience amongst trans people, specifically trans women. A “hon” is a trans woman who despite being on hormones does not pass, and instead looks like a man in a dress, a “hondose” is a dose of oestrogen that is deemed low and ineffective enough that it leads to the person becoming a “hon”. Within the framework established by these specific words, a “hon” is seen as something undesirable, a failed transition where one still reads as male.
Despite my dislike of the framework introduced by the terminology, as it is mostly used to self deprecate or insult others, what it touches on is a very real phenom. The act of providing inadequate care to trans people leading to them to be unsatisfied with their transition is common enough to be described with a specific linguistic term. This implies that inadequate care is an incredibly wide phenomenon, especially in for trans people who do not have agency over their own care. This means institutions that handle trans care are participating in the practice of providing inadequate care to trans people.
Since there is such a prevalence of inadequate care that is given to trans people there must be some throughline or connecting factor that that explains the incredible prevalence of disparate experience of inadequate transition care. I posit that this throughline is rooted in the ideological belief that persists through medical (and other) institutions that sets out to restrict who has access to transition related care. This means the practice of providing inadequate transition related care is built upon an ideological basis that prefers conversion practices to treating trans people with any form of care, and in turn that the preference to push trans people towards conversion practices instead of allowing them to access transition related care heavily informs the standards of care given to trans people.
This means that it is entirely possible for institutional providers of transition related care to utilise inadequate transition as a tool for conversion practices. By limiting access to high quality care, one can push a trans individual to believing transition is worthless, and that they should just live their life as the gender they were coercively assigned at birth. By itself, a low quality of care from an institution is not a marker of conversion practices, however when taken into consideration alongside other markers of conversion practices it becomes not only a marker of conversion practices, but one of the tools in the toolbox of the institution that aims to prevent as many trans people from existing as possible.
Now I ask you to place yourself in the shoes of the average Danish trans person for a minute. You have made it through years of waiting, punctuated by the occasional meeting with a “professional” who asks you if you like anal sex. Delays upon delays, each session and six month wait an excruciating wait where the only time you feel like you are making progress towards your goal of transition are when you are coerced into positions where you feel forced to talk about your sexual habits, how you perceive of yourself, and if you fit the prescribed stereotypes that you are expected to conform to. Every day you slowly feel the excruciating pain of your body being made to experience another day with the incorrect hormone profile, tortured by your own experience, yet at every step of the only legal way to alleviate this pain you are met with roadblocks and questions designed to dissuade you from transition. At the end of all of this you are finally given the opportunity to alleviate that pain; and then the dose is so low it is ineffective.
This low dose treatment can lead to incredibly negative effects for the individual. In some cases one can experience menopause, as there are literally not enough hormones in your body for you to function properly. In other cases the effects of your transition are so minimised that you are left feeling as though pursuing transition was a mistake. The standard dose of oestrogen that CKI prescribes is 50–100 μg a day via transdermal patches (or equivalent) ( 12 ). This dosage is within the lowest end of the doses that are recommended to transfeminine people( 13 ), this lower dosage leads to an incredibly drawn out and painful transition. I am not aware of the science behind what transmasculine people experience with regards to their dosage, but I can imagine that the experience is similar. The standard of care in Denmark has also included prescribing high doses of the androgen blocker cyproterone, these high doses of androgen blockers and low oestrogen can place you into menopause, I have seen it happen to loved ones of mine. The high doses of cyproterone also contribute to measurably increased cancer risks. This low quality of care is an extension of the conversion practices one fought to actually get any kind of care. Because if you are unsatisfied with the care, maybe all those doubts you had on if this was worth it were true, and you then don’t continue your transition.
ADDENDUM: After writing this section I was given a second-hand quote surrounding what one of the surgeons in Denmark who performs gender affirming surgeries said at a medical conference. The quote I received is as follows:
Der var til en medicisnk lægemøde en af de kiruger i Danmark der sagde at hun valge med vilje at ikke forbinde nerverne efter kirugien, da de vil få for meget nydelse ud af det (There was at a medical conference one of the surgeons who perform gender reassignment surgeries in Denmark, she said that she deliberately doesn’t connect the nerve endings after vaginoplasty as it would mean they get too much pleasure out of it)
I cannot confirm the voracity of this claim at the moment, but I have reached out to the person who told me this and I am attempting to verify the truth of this statement. If it comes out that this statement is in fact factual it would imply that the low quality of care is at worst maliciously informed, or at best based on incredibly biased assumptions as to why trans people transition. Either way this quote (which is still as of yet unverified) could magnify the severity of just how bad the quality of care in Denmark is, and in turn magnify the severity of the conversion practices at play.
Every single example I put forth in this article is an example of the institutional attitudes imbued within the Danish medical system, institutions that have a stranglehold upon the ways that trans people can access transition. By being the only purveyors of hormone replacement therapy in Denmark as the Danish medical system holds incredible amounts of power over the heads of the trans community within the country. Trans people are beholden to the doctors and nurses to be able to enact agency upon our own bodies. This means that any choice made regarding trans healthcare, and who is allowed to access it, is already beholden to an unjust and imbalanced power hierarchy that negatively impacts trans people’s lives.
This incredibly prominent power hierarchy within the system creates a dynamic where one must take a rigid material approach to analysing trans healthcare in Denmark. The intentions of the purveyors of hormones in Denmark are tainted by their position of power over the trans subject. By primarily looking at the effects of the ways the Danish medical institution treats their transgender patients, and then building an understanding based on that, we develop a robust understanding of the institutional attitudes that persist regarding trans access to care.
The institutions that today handle trans healthcare in Denmark are built upon a historic framework that seeks to restrict who has access to transition related care. They are based on a concept of transness that is incredibly medicalised. With desire to transition being understood as a sexual deviance on par with paedophilia. Gender dysphoria as described within this system derives from 19th and 20th century sexologists whose primary work consisted of “fixing” individuals so they no longer desire to transition.14 For these sexologists the primary reaction was to dissuade trans people from transitioning, with transition only being given as a last resort to those who could not be dissuaded or have their desire to transition satiated.15 This attitude towards transition and trans people means a lot of institutional systems surrounding trans healthcare became constructed around weeding out those who do not sufficiently meet the criteria of what it means to be trans according to a narrow criteria, and pushing them towards “alternative methods of treatment”. These “alternative” means of treating trans people are homogenous with conversion practices.
We see the spectre of these conversion practices looming over the ways that trans people are treated by the Danish medical systems that proport to provide care. Trans people are subject to invasive questioning as to the nature of their wishes to transition, they are pushed away from hormone replacement and given guidance that places doubt upon their identity in the hope that they desist and do not transition. People are turned away for not presenting in a certain manner, or being too brown, disabled, mad, agp, etc and refused care, instead being offered counselling sessions and therapy to help them align more with their true selves.
Trans people are routinely traumatised and pushed to alternative methods of care by the Danish medical institution. These methods have historically been incredibly overt in their goals, as was the case with SK, but are now much more covert and quiet about how they execute an ideology that attempts to reduce the amount of trans people who actually transition. By engaging in the practices that attempt to push trans people away from transition, medical institutions such as CKI are engaging in conversion practices. The evidence for these processes lies in the anecdotes and stories of trans people who were subject to the systemic and institutionalised push away from transition, occasionally through violent means.
Knowing that the default way the Danish government treats trans people is to push them away from transition through conversion practices is only the beginning. They cannot be permitted to continue their deplorable treatment of trans people. These institutions need to immediately stop with gatekeeping, waiting lists, and refusal to perform care. Instead the Danish medical institute needs to implement reforms in how hormone therapy is handled. It should be made accessible to all who desire it, without a process that pushes trans people away from transition. Ultimately though, the hope that these institutions can change is a difficult one to accept, because they are so institutionally bound to conversion practices. The only way to properly change institutional trans healthcare for the better is to remove the institutions that are built on conversion practices. Start over with new institutions that take trans peoples health and needs seriously. Trans people should be given agency over their transition, and not be forced through restrictive systems that aim to prevent us from living our lives to the fullest.
Here are the sources used in this essay; I do not have the energy to formulate them properly into a proper academic format. I thought it would just be better to publish the article with shitily formatted citations than sit on it until I had the executive function to “do it correctly”. If anyone wants to format them for me lmk, it’ll be a big help.
Sources not directly quoted, but read for this article:
Amnesty on Gender Rights and movements that push against it https://www.amnesty.org.uk/knowledge-hub/all-resources/the-anti-rights-movement/ ↩
Harvey Milk’s Gay Freedom Day Speech https://daily.jstor.org/harvey-milks-gay-freedom-day-speech-annotated/ ↩
Abigail Thorne on conversion practices in the UK and the history of Conversion practices https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_S5w18sjYLk ↩
Memorandum of understanding on conversion therapy in the UK https://www.bacp.co.uk/media/21242/memorandum-of-understanding-on-conversion-therapy-in-the-uk-july-2024.pdf ↩
Human Rights Comission on Convserion Therapy https://www.hrc.org/resources/the-lies-and-dangers-of-reparative-therapy ↩
Amnesty International’s Frank Morrigan https://www.amnesty.org.uk/knowledge-hub/all-resources/uk-worrying-loopholes-lgbt-conversion-therapy-consultation/ ↩
An explination of whar SK researches, (outdated) https://research.regionh.dk/en/organisations/sexologisk-klinik/ accessed april 7th 2025, archived and can be provided upon request ↩
CKI https://www.rigshospitalet.dk/afdelinger-og-klinikker/julianemarie/center-for-koensidentitet/sider/default.aspx ↩
KKBU https://www.psykiatri-regionh.dk/centre-og-social-tilbud/psykiatriske-centre/boerne-og-ungdomspsykiatrisk-center/om-centret/sider/kompetencecenter_k%C3%B8nsidentitet.aspx ↩
Abigail Thorne, Ibid. ↩
Abigail Thorne, Ibid. ↩
you just need to trust me on this one, unfortunately, but it’s based on multiple conversations I have had with over 20 trans women ↩
Aly, transfem science https://transfemscience.org/articles/e2-equivalent-doses/ ↩
Abigail Thorne, Ibid. ↩
Abigail Thorne, Ibid. ↩