Drug used to attempt to prevent transexualism, also hoped to reduce lesbianism

[The Good Reverend Roger]

They were doing that well up into the 70s, Roger, especially to teenage WoC who had kids.

The last case I heard was in the 80s.

[EK WAFFLR]

Norway, too had a eugenics program. http://heterodoxology.com/2010/04/11/eugenics-and-progressive-social-policies-in-norway/

[Reginald Ret]

Hmm, I don't think I necessarily agree with the "it might" part (I don't think you get to pick your sexuality; you get to choose whether to accept or pursue it, but it is what it is - otherwise we'd all be heterosexual) but the rest of it (including the fact that, "but so what?" ought to be the response, because responding otherwise is agreeing that homosexuality is teh baad, even just a little bit, with the haters) I agree with 100%.

Fuckers. Putting the 'design your own baby' subject aside, they DARE to endanger and lie to their patients for a fukken cosmetic improvement?

On the designer babies subject:
I wouldn't mind if people can do this kind of thing if they were allowed to take it it's logical extreme. I wan't actual angels to fly in the sky. I want to see animal/human hybrids, I want creatures straight out of Tolkien, I want people being born with the proper wetware to interface with computers, I want gills motherfucker!

I object to all of that on the basis that the kid had no say. I know that no one gets a say in how they're born, but that's far outside even the most extreme human norm and I can't condone that. Even extraordinary people, and your gilled angel would be, often hate being different in childhood, not to mention potential complications.

Sucky childhood is a social engineering problem, not a genetic engineering problem. I agree that this problem needs to be preemptively handled before even considering gengineered kids. (It would be greatly reduced if it was common but that is beside the point because we would still be exposing the first few generations to horrible childhoods.)
Potential medical complications, if not ridiculously unlikely, are a clear sign to not do it, obviously.

These are all problems that can be solved and I do not consider them strong arguments against allowing civilians to do it. After all, the govt. army, and nutjobs are going to do it anyway. Technology tends to be used and abused. The most you can do is slow it down and prepare so the negative effects are reduced as much as possible.

[von]

Although I find the lack of providing accurate information about the drug and it's potential side effects on the part of medical staff to be utterly abhorrent...

...this article seems to be highly slanted to make this seem like some evil cabal of homophobic doctors are trying to pray the gay away with profane technologies...which, as I'm reading things...is simply not the case.

Researching the chemical being "dubiously administered" to these women...it seems to be primarily indicated for promoting proper lung development in at-risk fetuses.

Going into the "evil" off-label use, note very well that intersex != transexual...nor is it equivalent to lesbianism, "tomboyishness" or any other socially-derived aspect of sexual identity. Intersexed fetuses physically develop with ambiguous genitals...as in "true" hermaphoditism...

...yeah...as in it has a long schlonggy dong as well as a malformed vagina...

So, bluntly stated, although the "clandestine" nature of administration this drug is presented with in this paper is indeed somewhat appalling, I see a very strong bias on account of the author to make this seem like something that's both homophobic and medically unethical, when in fact this treatment is for a physical condition, rather than a sociological one.