BBC removes trans charities from support page

@Wolfgirrl - absolutely- although from Keira Bell’s recent thread it seems that the lobbyists have succeeded in getting it redefined so it is no longer a mental health issue - I’m not sure how they define it though. Also Stonewall has stated (I’ve got a link somewhere) that you can be trans without having dysphoria (I really can’t see how that makes any sense) which moves the concept of transgender even further from the lay person’s understanding. I have also noticed that they are including ‘Cross dressing’ under the trans umbrella so it makes the whole concept so vague as to be meaningless. Leaving it all wide open to being defined at will by the self appointed ‘owners’ of the definitions - Stonewall -and making it virtually impossible to argue because it is so vague. I reread Animal Farm recently and it is sounding so familiar. Especially the bit about the incremental rewriting of the rules.

I believe in 'gender dysphoria' as a mental illness, but I think the number of people truly affected is tiny, and most of the people claiming to be affected today are probably not truly dysphoric.

I think there is going to be a huge number of people in 20 years' time seeking to reverse their surgery and go back to their original 'gender' and the NHS will have a lot of lawsuits on their hands. It will go down as a scandal like thalidomide etc.

I think the BBC are distancing themselves from being seen to 'promote' dodgy organisations like Mermaids and instead swapping for a more generalised 'speak to your GP' approach. That way they can absolve responsibility by taking the 'we were following the experts' route, sort of like what Johnson is doing with corona.

I suspect the BBC's in-house lawyers are hearing the distant rumble of massive class actions involving de-transitioners.

Yes, the sky is definitely becoming a distinct shade of grey....

I'm crossing my fingers that there HAVE been financial irregularities at Mermaids because I will laugh and laugh and laugh if I hear Susie Green saying "that money was just resting in my account"

Imagine the memes!

the distant rumble of massive class actions involving de-transitioners.

Such a shame that it takes legal pressure and the threat of monetary losses to effect change. Nobody really seems to care that much about lives ruined or the problems caused for women until it gets legal.

I suspect the BBC's in-house lawyers are hearing the distant rumble of massive class actions involving de-transitioners. While the Beeb is demonstrably ready to throw women licence payers under the latest trendy bus, I predict it will be much more careful with our money.

vivarium if that happens I'll have the tweet framed and hung in my living room 😂

I'm crossing my fingers that there HAVE been financial irregularities at Mermaids because I will laugh and laugh and laugh if I hear Susie Green saying "that money was just resting in my account"

I'd probably die of laughter.

Tell this to Welsh Gov't who have a trans-biased group writing the RSE curriculum, backed by a declared commitment to Stonewall.

I'm concerned to read that Liz Truss is rumoured to be for the sack shortly :(

It would make perfect sense. But sense and politicians rarely go hand in hand!

Will Mermaids be seeing big changes in the next week?

If the Times story from a few weeks back is correct, Liz Truss will be reporting on the governments plans for the GRA before parliamentary recess next Wednesday.

In April, when detailing the priorities of the Equalities Office she said,

"Finally, which is not a direct issue concerning the Gender Recognition Act, but is relevant, making sure that the under 18s are protected from decisions that they could make, that are irreversible in the future. I believe strongly that adults should have the freedom to lead their lives as they see fit, but I think it’s very important that while people are still developing their decision-making capabilities that we protect them from making those irreversible decisions."

Wouldn't it make sense for her to tackle both these difficult issues at the same time or am I being too optimistic?

Given the recent Newsnight report on GIDs and the current concerns about whistleblowers and safeguarding, and the likely involvement of Mermaids in all of those concerns, it seems unwise of the BBC to continue to link to Mermaids.

If this does all blow up, they won't be able to say they weren't aware of what was going on.

The thing that bothers me the most about mermaids are the obvious hoards of 18 year olds who can volunteer for an awful lot of contact with younger children. The new website is plastered with "ways you can help." It's going to be mostly younger woke types volunteering, as it's a trend and not a charity connected to middle or old age health issues.

I'm sure some are thinking they've being altruistic but the projection will be enormous and they'll have no real understanding of a raft of complex safeguarding issues in a mature way. And that's at the most positive end. At worst, they're very likely to be encouraging (or the other word beginning with G.)

This is not a neutral organisation and it is not a transparent organisation.

If the bbc have any semblance of safeguarding post Savile it's wise to remove such an organisation from its pages.

Thomasin describes in the times detrans article how an older TW encouraged and dismissed doubts and how she was encouraged via tumblr etc (groomed.)

I agree merry

I don’t think they are financially dodgy the way Kids Company were

Still think they are wholly irresponsible in multiple ways though

I think Mermaids are given unwarranted credibility as experts, but I haven't heard any evidence that they are financially irresponsible in the way that Kids Company was.

sorry - already spotted

Page 5 seems to have the Independent Examiner's report for 2018, but it is included out of order, at the end of the accounts.

So what’s happening at BBC? Are things final now?

I will never understand why people who claim to care about trans youth are against calls for Mermaids and GIDS to follow proper ethical and safeguarding procedures.

Yes, quite baffling really.

Same as the opposition to any studies to do with the topic. Especially on detransitioners. Better understanding is always good no?

Pleasechoose
Fair enough - I did not feel like scrolling through all the pages last night.
Still wonder why they changed accountants
and YYY to the number of people who think that qualified is good when it means bad !

Hmmm

Sorry - that wasn't to suggest t anything about Allison, more that this is more evidence that rather than assuming a neutral stance, Garden Court Chambers, in addition to being a Stonewall floofyfloof have an active commercial relationship with Mermaids which might colour their opinion.

Xan I don't understand the implications of that? Would Allison know? I suppose it's possible not.