Susie Green and Keira Bell on Newsnight

That is interesting, thank you. I did try and discuss this with my friend, at one point in the conversation she mentioned that if she dissented she would lose her job. This insidious capture of schools needs to be challenged at every point.

nicky a very key point.

Green has been emphasising the enormous emotional involvement of parents in their children's transition; her own story as she has shared it illustrates this. Again this shows why it is right that an impartial court should be looking at all people in this situation and their needs to agree on the best course for the child's best long term interests held apart from any adult investment or beliefs, regardless of how sincerely held.

@SirVixofVixHall

I think the ethos in schools on this is part of the problem . If you are completely affirmed in this mid-teen dysphoria by everyone at school, if your teachers , who you trust, now call you a boy , where is there to go when you grow up a bit and start to regret that identity?

In the judgment, they made reference to this sort of thing. In the section where the judges were reviewing the law and relevant cases that were precedents, one of the cases that they highlighted at para 114 was:-

Re L (Medical Treatment: Gillick Competency) [1998] 2 F.L.R. 810

In this case, a 14 year old girl who was a Jehovah's Witness was refusing a blood transfusion which would save her life and "that the girl’s view as to having no blood transfusion is based on a very sincerely, strongly held religious belief which does not in fact lend itself in her mind to discussion".

On the other hand,:-

"It is one that has been formed by her in the context of her own family experience and the Jehovah’s Witness meetings where they all support this view."

So her whole experience was only of affirmation in this belief - in the same way that you mention everyone at school (and, no doubt, on social media) calling the pupil a boy. The judge then went on to point out:-

"He makes the point that there is a distinction between a view of this kind and the constructive formulation of an opinion which occurs with adult experience. That has not happened of course in the case of this young girl.”

"It is, therefore, a limited experience of life which she has – inevitably so – but this is in no sense a criticism of her or of her upbringing... But it does necessarily limit her understanding of matters which are as grave as her own present situation."

The courts do recognise that being in an echo chamber or self-contained bubble without hearing any dissenting voices does not enable a child to fully understand important issues.

Yes, I see Jolyon has redirected his crowdfunder to pay for it.

Currently on a webinar where a barrister is discussing the fact that this case is now on appeal and that there are issues with the judgment which can be challenged.

Slow hand claps for the BBC too. Look at that deliberately unflattering picture of Graham Linehan that someone chose to accompany the article. Made him look literally like a swivel-eyed loon. Deliberate, unprofessional decisiom.

Indeed she has. But if there was a possibility she might actually allow a glimmer of uncertainty to manifest itself and try to step away, Mermaids might have stifled it.

A cynical person in Watson's position might wager her chances of escaping the sinking ship successfully, and decide it's better to keep the ship afloat for her own sake. Even if the ship deserves to sink.

Mermaids, having supported ‘thousands’ of trans children and their families (according to Suze) both within and outside the NHS system over a number of years, were uniquely placed to compile their own data.

And they didn’t. So they had fuck all evidence to present.

No family member or boss or colleague or stranger can make you who you're not. Open or secret (for now) you're you".

On the face of it that's a kind, compassionate statement, showing due regard for every human being to be 'who they are', whatever that means, and live the way they want to live. What reasonable person could possibly argue with that? How are people's decisions about their personal identities affecting other people? How is this hurting them?

Until it comes to detransitioners.

This group of people are spoken about like pariahs by these ideological zealots. They are treated as though they are somehow traitors to a 'movement', albeit personal decisions about personal identity are not hurting others. Then why the hostility? Supposedly Keira Bell's trauma, her experiences, are worthy of nothing because she's supposedly 'atypical'. She was one of them, but she found her way back, just like those tweets claiming 'leaving' the 'gender critical movement' is akin to a painful break from an abusive partner. These people have DARVO down to a fine art.

The way in which Suzie Green callously minimised Keira Bell's experience (because there are hardly any people like that; more ad-hoc, nebulous 'statistics'-that-never-were) says a great deal about Suzie Green and none of it pretty. But they don't matter, according to Mermaids' CEO. Even though according to their own rhetoric no one can make you who you're not.

How anyone can take a word this woman says seriously, and how Mermaids have become the force for reckoning with they clearly are, beats the fuck out of me. Hopefully this judgement will clip their wings for a bit. I believe they are a dangerous organisation.

I suppose people’s PRs will be working overtime today.

I did notice that they retweeted Emma Watson’s tweet along with that gem. Trying to drag as many people down as possible with them

It does seem like that doesn't it.

No sense if responsibility at all. If there was evidence she should have submitted it. Unless of course she wanted the "out"..

Is pulling Watson into this again an example of forced-teaming?

Some of these people are proper bonkers. They write so many words, but completely miss the point of the judges’ rulings.

Here’s a US based kiddie gender quack: archive.md/H6ctg

And this one self describes as a ‘transfeminine bioethicist’ archive.md/2Nbqp

Mad as a box of frogs.

There are so many interesting aspects to this. One is that the concept of "trans kids" is a vital prop for the gender identity ideology. The purpose is to make a large part of the groups falling under the trans umbrella to fade into the background because "look! it's kids! no one would oppose kids being happy!"

But this contains a real weakness. The moment the public perceive "trans kids" as "life-changing medical experimentation on children" support can rapidly turn to hostility against groups like Mermaids.

They’ve never heard of influencers, heros or role models then?

Oh God, one of those tweets.

"To those still awake, remember: no court, no politician, no actress, no author, actor or writer, no judge or troll or neighbour or friend. No family member or boss or colleague or stranger can make you who you're not. Open or secret (for now) you're you."

Yeah, you should have been upfront that people can't make you something you're not right from the start. Muppets.

The shrill twittering is on the Mermaids account, rather than the SG one.

Yesterday’s archive archive.md/y3lMI

One from just now: archive.md/T2rVY

GIRES statement is similar bluster to Green, but somehow denies that ‘transgender’ children are vulnerable, so undermines Green’s suicide mongering

archive.md/AHsV7

Whilst we would say that being trans, in a systemically transphobic society creates places where you could be vulnerable to damaging discourse, a trans child is not inherently vulnerable. To the contrary, most trans children we know are incredibly strong, resilient, intelligent and understanding. What they need is timely, robust, and less onerous access to healthcare, not to be patronised and stonewalled by judges who believe they know better than medical doctors and clinicians.

I wonder if they realise that encouraging GIDS to take this to the Supreme Court could well result in the ruling extending beyond the current England and Wales jurisdiction? Because that’s a double or quits gamble that I don’t think most trans orgs will want to take.

SRS under the age of 18 isn't legal in Thailand now.

Also not seeing anything much on Green's Twitter - have there been deletions?

There isn't any evidence in their favour. If there was, the high court would have been the very best place to present it, to prove doubters wrong.

Not stopping TRAs posting their blog links all over Twitter trying to prove the judges wrong though, bless 'em. Their ship is sinking.