Also In The News - part 3

[The Doctor]

20 minutes ago, jgtuk said:

That’s strange because I read the opposite, one side has an argument based on bigotry, the other seems to be scientific… 

I also come from a place of relative ignorance, although I had two very close friends who transitioned in the 80’s and I know what a difference it made to their lives. 
I have also seen how homosexuality has been treated historically and see a parallel regarding the bigotry in the media and parts of society. 

Because it is exactly the same things and the same people saying it. The antitrans moral panic was kicked off in the wake of Obergefell as a divide and conquer strategy, this is hardly a secret: https://www.splcenter.org/hatewatch/2017/10/23/christian-right-tips-fight-transgender-rights-separate-t-lgb

[RobHawk]

1 hour ago, The Doctor said:

Because it is exactly the same things and the same people saying it. The antitrans moral panic was kicked off in the wake of Obergefell as a divide and conquer strategy, this is hardly a secret: https://www.splcenter.org/hatewatch/2017/10/23/christian-right-tips-fight-transgender-rights-separate-t-lgb

Ok forget your science a minute, because none of that made sense to me anyway. 

 

But is there any harm, or does it make someone anti trans, to say that being a young person going through puberty is alot in any day and age, let alone these days with social media etc. Therefore common sense would suggest that waiting until you are a bit older to make that decision, isn't necessarily a bad thing. I'm happy for you to tell me this opinion is incorrect because of the science, but it's not necessarily coming from a position of hatred towards the trans community, it's just a different view point from someone who tries to apply common sense to all aspects of life. 

 

I understand your argument about the anti trans movement and certain sections of society making this an bigger issue that it doesn't need to be, but as with any argument it is never black and white and there is grey area. 

 

I understand and accept that I am not best placed to make this judgement and you are very clearly on one side of the argument but that doesn't mean this grey area doesn't exist. 

[RobHawk]

2 hours ago, jgtuk said:

That’s strange because I read the opposite, one side has an argument based on bigotry, the other seems to be scientific… 

I also come from a place of relative ignorance, although I had two very close friends who transitioned in the 80’s and I know what a difference it made to their lives. 
I have also seen how homosexuality has been treated historically and see a parallel regarding the bigotry in the media and parts of society. 

See my reply above, does that class as bigotry?

[jgtuk]

1 minute ago, RobHawk said:

See my reply above, does that class as bigotry?

Sorry, you misunderstand. I was not accusing you of bigotry, after all you actually stated you were speaking from a place of ignorance.

I was speaking on a wider scale (mostly media and media fuelled bigotry).

I do, however, look at the science and historical attitudes to other minorities. Common sense doesn't exist imo.

 

[The Doctor]

15 minutes ago, RobHawk said:

Ok forget your science a minute, because none of that made sense to me anyway. 

 

But is there any harm, or does it make someone anti trans, to say that being a young person going through puberty is alot in any day and age, let alone these days with social media etc. Therefore common sense would suggest that waiting until you are a bit older to make that decision, isn't necessarily a bad thing. I'm happy for you to tell me this opinion is incorrect because of the science, but it's not necessarily coming from a position of hatred towards the trans community, it's just a different view point from someone who tries to apply common sense to all aspects of life. 

 

I understand your argument about the anti trans movement and certain sections of society making this an bigger issue that it doesn't need to be, but as with any argument it is never black and white and there is grey area. 

 

I understand and accept that I am not best placed to make this judgement and you are very clearly on one side of the argument but that doesn't mean this grey area doesn't exist. 

Tbqh you lost me at "forget the science a minute" because what else should a proper public health policy be based on if not the science, given that is the reflection on safety, efficacy and ethics? 

 

The issue with this is that, with all due respect, it comes from a cisnormative point of view. If we actually want to say "wait until you're older to make such a major decision [whether you want to be a man/woman]" then the conclusion would be puberty blockers for everyone, because going through the puberty associated with your birth sex isn't a neutral act, it's harmful to trans people, creating a lot of extra things that you may want as part of transition (mastectomies for trans men, facial hair removal for trans women, voice training for both). Puberty blockers would buy time for everyone to decide whether they wanted to go through a natal puberty or a cross-sex one, but it's not seen that way because society is cisnormative, cis people are ~99% of the population based on the last census and so being cisgender is seen as the default, as neutral and any step away from that is seen as acting and making a decision.

[Tommy G]

I've just watched Diane Abbott stand up 46 times on sky news. 

[ClaphamFox]

1 hour ago, The Doctor said:

Because it is exactly the same things and the same people saying it. The antitrans moral panic was kicked off in the wake of Obergefell as a divide and conquer strategy, this is hardly a secret: https://www.splcenter.org/hatewatch/2017/10/23/christian-right-tips-fight-transgender-rights-separate-t-lgb

You have a habit of dismissing anybody who does not share your views on this issue as being on the far right. This is, of course, a well-worn cliché beloved by certain trans rights activists, particularly those based in the US. 

 

The problem is, it's a complete lie. There are many people across the political spectrum who have no problem with others presenting as the opposite sex if they wish, but have concerns about the idea that a human being can become the opposite sex simply by wishing it so. This is not an unreasonable position because no human being has ever become a member of the opposite sex. The argument that a person may have a 'gender' that is different to their sex depends is highly subjective and depends on whether you believe in gender or not. There are many people who regard it as nothing more than a quasi-theological concept with no more weight than any other theological belief. 

Whistleblowers working in gender identity settings have been raising serious concerns for years about the rush to medically transition children. Countries that have previously prescribed puberty blockers to children (including France, Sweden, Finland and the Netherlands) have since started to pull back from prescribing them as they're seeing the outcomes. Are they all part of a right-wing conspiracy or is it just possible that their concerns are valid and borne of experience? It's not surprising that the US is still far behind on this issue as it remains in the grip of a toxic mix of extreme activism and pharmaceutical capitalism. Healthy girls in their early teens have had double mastectomies in the US - that tells you everything you need to know about how insane that country is.

 

Dr Hilary Cass's report into the Tavistock Clinic stated that puberty blockers could “permanently disrupt” brain development, reduce bone density and lock children into a regime of cross-sex hormones requiring life-long patienthood. She noted that clinicians at the Tavistock were under enormous pressure to 'affirm' a child's new gender identity even if there were clearly other issues that needed exploring, including autism, mental health problems, trauma from abuse, etc. And we know that Cass's report was true in this regard because Dr David Bell, who worked at the Tavistock for more than 20 years, has confirmed it. According to Bell, the large majority of young people who presented at the clinic would desist within a few years if left to their own devices. Here is an interview he gave to Channel Four a few years ago where he goes into more detail about the absolutely horrific treatment that children received at the Tavistock:

https://www.channel4.com/news/children-have-been-very-seriously-damaged-by-nhs-gender-clinic-says-former-tavistock-staff-governor

 

Are Cass and Bell just far right extremists with an axe to grind, too?

[The Doctor]

Just now, ClaphamFox said:

You have a habit of dismissing anybody who does not share your views on this issue as being on the far right. This is, of course, a well-worn cliché beloved by certain trans rights activists, particularly those based in the US. 

 

The problem is, it's a complete lie. There are many people across the political spectrum who have no problem with others presenting as the opposite sex if they wish, but have concerns about the idea that a human being can become the opposite sex simply by wishing it so. This is not an unreasonable position because no human being has ever become a member of the opposite sex. The argument that a person may have a 'gender' that is different to their sex depends is highly subjective and depends on whether you believe in gender or not. There are many people who regard it as nothing more than a quasi-theological concept with no more weight than any other theological belief. 

Whistleblowers working in gender identity settings have been raising serious concerns for years about the rush to medically transition children. Countries that have previously prescribed puberty blockers to children (including France, Sweden, Finland and the Netherlands) have since started to pull back from prescribing them as they're seeing the outcomes. Are they all part of a right-wing conspiracy or is it just possible that their concerns are valid and borne of experience? It's not surprising that the US is still far behind on this issue as it remains in the grip of a toxic mix of extreme activism and pharmaceutical capitalism. Healthy girls in their early teens have had double mastectomies in the US - that tells you everything you need to know about how insane that country is.

 

Dr Hilary Cass's report into the Tavistock Clinic stated that puberty blockers could “permanently disrupt” brain development, reduce bone density and lock children into a regime of cross-sex hormones requiring life-long patienthood. She noted that clinicians at the Tavistock were under enormous pressure to 'affirm' a child's new gender identity even if there were clearly other issues that needed exploring, including autism, mental health problems, trauma from abuse, etc. And we know that Cass's report was true in this regard because Dr David Bell, who worked at the Tavistock for more than 20 years, has confirmed it. According to Bell, the large majority of young people who presented at the clinic would desist within a few years if left to their own devices. Here is an interview he gave to Channel Four a few years ago where he goes into more detail about the absolutely horrific treatment that children received at the Tavistock:

https://www.channel4.com/news/children-have-been-very-seriously-damaged-by-nhs-gender-clinic-says-former-tavistock-staff-governor

 

Are Cass and Bell just far right extremists with an axe to grind, too?

Bell absolutely is, and the Cass review had conversion therapy advocates (Riittakerttu Kaltiala) on the panel so you tell me. The simple facts are that the antitrans movement is lead by the far right and those who join it go down a far right rabbit hole (see JKR tweeting Holocaust denial yesterday)

[David Hankey]

16 minutes ago, Tommy G said:

I've just watched Diane Abbott stand up 46 times on sky news. 

Incredible that the Speaker didn't notice her. I wonder what his agenda is?

[ClaphamFox]

37 minutes ago, The Doctor said:

Bell absolutely is, and the Cass review had conversion therapy advocates (Riittakerttu Kaltiala) on the panel so you tell me. The simple facts are that the antitrans movement is lead by the far right and those who join it go down a far right rabbit hole (see JKR tweeting Holocaust denial yesterday)

Would you care to provide any evidence that Dr Bell is on the far right? Or is that merely a tautological assumption based upon your view that anybody who raises questions about this stuff must be on the far right? Dr Kaltiala is a professor of adolescent psychiatry with extensive experience of working with young people presenting with gender dysphoria. Is it not possible that her opposition to puberty blockers is based on her lengthy experience of them? And what about Hannah Barnes's book on the Tavistock, which was based on extensive interviews with former clinicians who worked there and patients who were treated there? Have you read it? It's deeply disturbing. Here is an excerpt from the Guardian's review of the book, which I think is particularly prescient in the current discussion:
 

"Such a book cannot easily be dismissed. To do so, a person would not only have to be wilfully ignorant, they would also – to use the popular language of the day – need to be appallingly unkind. This is the story of the hurt caused to potentially hundreds of children since 2011, and perhaps before that. To shrug in the face of that story – to refuse to listen to the young transgender people whose treatment caused, among other things, severe depression, sexual dysfunction, osteoporosis and stunted growth, and whose many other problems were simply ignored – requires a callousness that would be far beyond my imagination were it not for the fact that, thanks to social media, I already know such stony-heartedness to be out there."

 

It must be fun to be able to respond to anything which contradicts your worldview by closing your eyes, sticking your fingers in your ears and saying, "La la la la...right wing conspiracy...la la la". Indeed, to be fair, this tactic has proven to be highly effective over the past decade. I sense, however, that this strange period in which activists have succeeding in shutting down debate on important issues by screaming 'right-wing bigot' at those with different views is coming to a close. If you want to continue advocating for puberty blockers etc while medical services around the world pull back from prescribing them, you're going to have to become a lot better at arguing your case.

 

 

[bovril]

I find the constant claims and counter claims of racism very tiresome but didn't Abbott once complain about European immigrants taking jobs in London, and that they didn't understand the English language or institutions? Pretty awful woman. 

[Tommy G]

Can't be arsed to scroll back through the thread but I presume the Kate and William thing has been covered. Not a royalist and don't usually take much interest but there is definitely something very fishy, found myself in a media black hole yesterday looking at all the potential theories about whats going on. Weird aswell that her sister Pippa's ex was found dead, hand gun nearby - I think I've been watching too much netflix but it will be interesting how this one plays out. 

[foxy boxing]

1 hour ago, David Hankey said:

Incredible that the Speaker didn't notice her. I wonder what his agenda is?

Rishi Sunak sounding more and more like Sepp Blatter saying you can solve racism though a handshake or forgiveness.  No you solve racism by calling it out, having harsh consequences for it and teaching those that do it even if they casually do it that it is wrong and won't be tolerated. The speaker was wrong not to let her speak. Wonder what his reasons were!.

[Tommy G]

13 minutes ago, foxy boxing said:

Rishi Sunak sounding more and more like Sepp Blatter saying you can solve racism though a handshake or forgiveness.  No you solve racism by calling it out, having harsh consequences for it and teaching those that do it even if they casually do it that it is wrong and won't be tolerated. The speaker was wrong not to let her speak. Wonder what his reasons were!.

If you are triggered by what Rishi said, take a look at Michael Gove's pathetic drivel this morning. 

[RobHawk]

1 hour ago, The Doctor said:

Tbqh you lost me at "forget the science a minute" because what else should a proper public health policy be based on if not the science, given that is the reflection on safety, efficacy and ethics? 

 

The issue with this is that, with all due respect, it comes from a cisnormative point of view. If we actually want to say "wait until you're older to make such a major decision [whether you want to be a man/woman]" then the conclusion would be puberty blockers for everyone, because going through the puberty associated with your birth sex isn't a neutral act, it's harmful to trans people, creating a lot of extra things that you may want as part of transition (mastectomies for trans men, facial hair removal for trans women, voice training for both). Puberty blockers would buy time for everyone to decide whether they wanted to go through a natal puberty or a cross-sex one, but it's not seen that way because society is cisnormative, cis people are ~99% of the population based on the last census and so being cisgender is seen as the default, as neutral and any step away from that is seen as acting and making a decision.

The reason I said forget the science, is because there's differing views across the science community as claphamfox has gone on to prove. 

 

Ultimately, my point was trying to convey, that just because people don't agree with your view point, they don't hate trans people and they don't see trans as a problem or issue. 

 

And now I'm going to bow out, reminding myself why I tend not to get involved in these debates on issues that ultimately are pretty low down on my agenda of issues in this country.

[st albans fox]

1 hour ago, David Hankey said:

Incredible that the Speaker didn't notice her. I wonder what his agenda is?

I’d assume that all backbenchers who wanted to ask a question and weren’t selected stood up 46 times aswell. 
I guess we’d need to know when she last asked a question at pmq’s 

 

[MPH]

43 minutes ago, Tommy G said:

Can't be arsed to scroll back through the thread but I presume the Kate and William thing has been covered. Not a royalist and don't usually take much interest but there is definitely something very fishy, found myself in a media black hole yesterday looking at all the potential theories about whats going on. Weird aswell that her sister Pippa's ex was found dead, hand gun nearby - I think I've been watching too much netflix but it will be interesting how this one plays out. 

 

 

Yeah. She's not helped herself really.  more unwarranted attention and the conspiracists are lapping it up...

[Tommy G]

5 minutes ago, MPH said:

 

 

Yeah. She's not helped herself really.  more unwarranted attention and the conspiracists are lapping it up...

Now on a 17 part tick tok on all the whole thing. Not sure why but I can't keep away

[MPH]

11 minutes ago, Tommy G said:

Now on a 17 part tick tok on all the whole thing. Not sure why but I can't keep away

 

 

If even half of the things that have allegedly happened are True, then shame on Will... you think after all the things his mother  went through and how that effected her then he'd stay well clear of all that mess..

[The Doctor]

1 hour ago, ClaphamFox said:

Would you care to provide any evidence that Dr Bell is on the far right? Or is that merely a tautological assumption based upon your view that anybody who raises questions about this stuff must be on the far right? Dr Kaltiala is a professor of adolescent psychiatry with extensive experience of working with young people presenting with gender dysphoria. Is it not possible that her opposition to puberty blockers is based on her lengthy experience of them? And what about Hannah Barnes's book on the Tavistock, which was based on extensive interviews with former clinicians who worked there and patients who were treated there? Have you read it? It's deeply disturbing. Here is an excerpt from the Guardian's review of the book, which I think is particularly prescient in the current discussion:
 

"Such a book cannot easily be dismissed. To do so, a person would not only have to be wilfully ignorant, they would also – to use the popular language of the day – need to be appallingly unkind. This is the story of the hurt caused to potentially hundreds of children since 2011, and perhaps before that. To shrug in the face of that story – to refuse to listen to the young transgender people whose treatment caused, among other things, severe depression, sexual dysfunction, osteoporosis and stunted growth, and whose many other problems were simply ignored – requires a callousness that would be far beyond my imagination were it not for the fact that, thanks to social media, I already know such stony-heartedness to be out there."

 

It must be fun to be able to respond to anything which contradicts your worldview by closing your eyes, sticking your fingers in your ears and saying, "La la la la...right wing conspiracy...la la la". Indeed, to be fair, this tactic has proven to be highly effective over the past decade. I sense, however, that this strange period in which activists have succeeding in shutting down debate on important issues by screaming 'right-wing bigot' at those with different views is coming to a close. If you want to continue advocating for puberty blockers etc while medical services around the world pull back from prescribing them, you're going to have to become a lot better at arguing your case.

 

 

Bell is crank who claims to be a tavistock whistleblower despite never having actually worked in the GIDS: https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/dr_david_bell_employment_at_gids

 

He's also one of the primary sources of Barnes hatchet job, which makes that book laughable, along with the fact that she sources all of her information on youth transition from a detransition Reddit site:

 

 

As for Kaltiala, she is part of SEGM, a very shadily funded conversion therapy group who promote junk science like Littmans ROGD study: https://transsafety.network/posts/segm-uncovered/

Her experience working with youth with gender dysphoria is only evidence of the issues with youth gender services not adequately vetting staff to protect it's patients from dangerous ideologues like herself and the Evans (another one of Barnes sources).

 

The science on transition is pretty clear, there's low levels of desistance and that gender transition is very clearly good for trans people: https://whatweknow.inequality.cornell.edu/topics/lgbt-equality/what-does-the-scholarly-research-say-about-the-well-being-of-transgender-people/ - the denial of that to children is part of an overall move to drive the needle against transition as a whole which is lead by the far right very openly, even if misguided people try to run interference and pretend it's an apolitical project 

[The Doctor]

54 minutes ago, RobHawk said:

The reason I said forget the science, is because there's differing views across the science community as claphamfox has gone on to prove. 

 

Ultimately, my point was trying to convey, that just because people don't agree with your view point, they don't hate trans people and they don't see trans as a problem or issue. 

 

And now I'm going to bow out, reminding myself why I tend not to get involved in these debates on issues that ultimately are pretty low down on my agenda of issues in this country.

I understood your point, it was just wrong. The entire topic being a debate point is because of latent bigotry, it's just systemic discrimination and so deeply engrained that people don't recognise it as bigotry or even intentionally be bigoted, just consider it as how things are.

[RobHawk]

11 minutes ago, The Doctor said:

I understood your point, it was just wrong. The entire topic being a debate point is because of latent bigotry, it's just systemic discrimination and so deeply engrained that people don't recognise it as bigotry or even intentionally be bigoted, just consider it as how things are.

And this is the perfect example of where you and your approach to the subject are wrong and actually doing more damage to the cause of trans people 👍

[The Doctor]

Just now, RobHawk said:

And this is the perfect example of where you and your approach to the subject are wrong and actually doing more damage to the cause of trans people 👍

If you consider pointing out unconscious biases as being harmful then that says far more about you than anyone else 👍

[Wymsey]

A bit bleak for some flat owners..

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/ckkvkv32e1ro

 

[The Doctor]

For those who are actually interested in the topic, this is a good deconstruction of the Cass Review (the underpinning for this decision) and the extent to which it was a stitch up: https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/26895269.2024.2328249

 

That it expressly discounted the input of SMEs (“deliberately does not contain subject matter experts or people with lived experience of gender services” [Report 1, version 1]) would be enough to discount it as a hatchet job by anyone approaching without an unconscious (or very conscious) bias against trans people.