NHS told: give trans patients equal access to fertility service

Read that tweet screenshot - the bit about motherhood being defined by gestation. This is about appropriation of femaleness.

bowl that is fucking disgusting

I wonder if what we're actually dealing with here then - in some cases - is potentially preferential treatment for men with AGP and the exploitation of the NHS to fund a sexual fetish. Until you can clearly distinguish AGP from trans I don't understand how this is acceptable.

I'd like to know more about the money behind all of this. Who are these trans lobbies? Who here is threatening legal action? It's not good enough to say 'a watchdog'. Can't help but wonder why they feel the need to be anonymous.

Unbelievable. Aren't there enough people waiting to be treated for actual illnesses and injuries, many of them life-changing or terminal? Not sure about fertility treatment being offered anyway with the poor NHS in the current state, but this just leaves the mind well and truly boggled ... can't be too long before a transwoman is demanding the right to a womb transplant (while keeping the ladypenis no doubt)

But it isn’t realistic to expect a child to want to be able to have their own children, so it’s up to the parents to say ‘we need to preserve that option for them’ so that, when they get to an age when they do want to start thinking about it, at least then they have the choice.”

Yes, isn't it realistic for parents to say wait until you get to an age where you can think about it.

AGP is a fetish, otherwise known as cross-dressing. Not a medical disorder as far as I know.

The level of influence they have is downright frightening...regardless of what that influence is...just that amount of influence. This alone should make people wonder what is going on.

Is AGP classed as a medical disorder?

Gender identity is not a medical disorder> it needs urgent hormone treatment to treat it > of course children can consent to this > they can't fully understand the implications for their fertility though, so by "consent" we mean not fully informed consent > rather than wondering if and when they can consent to this we will decide for them that the best way forward is another medical procedure until they're old enough to understand > but it's not a medical disorder.

From the Guardian article in the OP

The mother of a 14-year-old trans boy, who asked not to be identified, told the Observer: “Not all trans kids would want to choose it in the same way that not all non-trans children would want to go on and have their own children. But it isn’t realistic to expect a child to want to be able to have their own children, so it’s up to the parents to say ‘we need to preserve that option for them’ so that, when they get to an age when they do want to start thinking about it, at least then they have the choice.”

This parent is admitting that their child does not fully understand the consequences of their actions. And yet this parent has allowed their child to start down this route. Probably arguing that they 'know who they are' and that they do understand what they are doing.

Bowl and Heresy
When I thought nothing else could shock me!
😯😯😯

Fucking frightening.

Children are not possessions that 'the government' is obliged to provide you with at any cost. I am deeply disturbed by the dehumanisation and disembodiment of women and children pedaled through the TRA agenda.

My sister didn't freeze eggs before starting chemo. Her cancer was fast growing, hormone receptive and there just wasn't time. Potentially sacrificing her fertility saved her life. She has no children.
I won't be a surrogate nor egg donor for her. I've thought seriously about it but I can't do it, it is too big a risk for my family - if I were even suitable.

TRAs. Grow the fuck up. The world is not here to prop up every one of your longings, no matter how intense or sincere.

This will potentially have the benefit of shining an ethical spotlight on the radicalised medicalisation of teenagers' (probably normal and temporary) gender issues. One hopes.

To be clear, I also think certain trans activist's goals is to go beyond surrogacy. Here is a frank Twitter thread from the Trans Pregnancy Project which talks about uterine transplants for trans women. Would the NHS be obliged to offer these if the technology were made available?

twitter.com/transpregnancy/status/1009386366575226881

transpregnancy.leeds.ac.uk/

Benefits cut for refusing sex work.

It’s already happened in Germany.

www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/germany/1482371/If-you-dont-take-a-job-as-a-prostitute-we-can-stop-your-benefits.html

When childless step parents struggling with infertility through no fault of their own can't even have treatment on the NHS how can they justify spending money on a choice made to remove fertility.

My Local NHS commissioning body (the people who decide who gets what and what they'll pay for) pledges not to discriminate on the grounds of gender. They got rid of 'sex' as a protected characteristic.

Logically, they will consider trans couples for treatment already.

What do you say NHS Commissioners?

'Well you refused a perfectly good surrogacy job...’

That all rather ties in nicely doesn't it with the support for normalisation and legalisation of prostitution. It's been mentioned before, but if prostitution is just another job with unions and health and safety, then the logical endpoint is that women have no business turning such employment down. Sometimes I think that's all far fetched and then I read what some of them are genuinely arguing.

But if children presenting with gender dysphoria were allowed to go through puberty & actually develop normally (brains maturing etc) 90% would be happy to stay living as the sex they are, ....hence a greatly reduced number of young adults could then have discussions about options for their future. The case for stopping puberty blockers has never been clearer imho.

You can just see the universal credit sanction in ten years time can’t you? ‘Well you refused a perfectly good surrogacy job...’

Yes. It's horrifying.

There have been some articles, they haven't generated the same level of traction though.

Daily Mail article January 2017:
www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-4100344/4-female-cancer-patients-eggs-embryos-frozen-treatment.html

Or are the so terrified of the TRA lobby that they'd rather sink the NHS first?

Yes. The TRA lobby must have its demands satisfied at all costs. The safety of women and children? Not important. The safety of vulnerable female prisoners? Not important. What is important is men's feelings and demands - these must be satisfied no matter what it costs.

The Mail reported on children having fertility preservation last year, here picked up by Telegraph- it gives costs for storage: www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/10/01/nhs-clinics-freezing-sperm-eggs-teens-ahead-sex-change-surgery/

So to summarise, a transgender lobby group is threatening to sue the NHS for parity of fertility treatment options with cancer patients which does not actually offer parity for actual cancer patients!

Meanwhile the groups and inviduals who have been seeking parity of treatment for female cancer patients have little in the way of finance, access to decision makers or influential power and so few will have been aware of this issue. Certainly this sex bias and postcode-lottery has not been an issue to make national news.

You can just see the universal credit sanction in ten years time can’t you? ‘Well you refused a perfectly good surrogacy job...’