Really? I like how you added 'this one is a bit of a parody' for the last one, as if the other ones weren't.

But if you think about the topic a bit more seriously, there are plenty of other situations in which doctors do indeed try to intervene in entirely natural processes that negatively impact the patients' social life, mental health or future life prospects more generally, including during childhood. Ranging from minor stuff like braces for more regular teeth, to more intrusive ones like breast reduction surgery for girls with unusually large breasts that put too much strain on their backs, to even more serious ones like the various treatment options for children who are extremely tall or extremely short.

Of course, in all of those cases, pros and cons must be weighed and doctors may reach different recommendations for different patients depending on their individual circumstances - it's the same way for children with gender dysphoria. But I don't see any medical or logical reason why puberty blockers should be a priori off the table - of course, there are religious/philosophical reasons, but those are rather more subjective...

I'm not sure you do see my point, because the main reason I brought this up concerned your views on how much children should get to decide for themselves, even if their parents have a different view. Because, from what I understood, once they're 18 you would actually allow them to decide for themselves? What about when they're minors but their parents are in fact on board with the puberty blockers? Or is your position that not only puberty blockers but quite simply all hormone treatment and surgery for trans people should be banned, even for adults?

I don't think you need to imagine actually being trans in order to think about the situation. Although you do need to be open-minded enough to consider the possibility of people thinking very differently from how you do and them not being automatically wrong on that account...

As you mentioned above, you can't understand how it feels to carry a child in a womb either, but nevertheless you are aware that many people do carry children in their wombs and that it's generally desirable for them to have medical support in that process. This argument isn't making any sense to me.

See above - it was never meant to be a full analogy, but it was to gauge your views more generally on how much decision power children should have in difficult medical situations.