So disgusted tonight

If she is talking about young teens then she would be right. You don't set them off on a medical pathway they cannot reverse at that age. Especially as they cannot understand the full ramifications of such decisions.

Whatever the age then detailed and accurate information is required. Not the half lies and guesswork people the Weberleys peddle, no matter how much what they say is what transitioners want to hear.

That you cannot or will not engage with that is problematic.

@ShinyRainbow "The parents' preferences don't matter.
Children aren't their parents' property, and they don't exist to fulfill their parents' wishes."

I don't know in which country you live but here in England parents are legally responsible for their children and their wellbeing until those children achieve legal adult status at 18 years. So yes, in some circumstances, the preferences of parents do matter when it relates to the wellbeing and healthy development of their child.

Given that the human brain does not achieve full maturity in terms of its cognitive development until at least the age of 25 years, it may be debatable that adult status at 18 years is relevant in some circumstances.

Again, it's offensive if you believe in gender identity ideology, because "gender" is innate and dysphoria is a natural reaction to having the "wrong" sex. Not everyone believes in gender identity ideology, and they may see thedysphoria as a psychological condition which can be ameliorated or cured.

‘How is this different from attempting to make gay people "reconcile" with their "reproductive role"?’

Nobody has a ‘reproductive role’. Most of us have the capacity to reproduce. And we all have a biological sex.

I’m accepting of people who wish to transition because they are distressed by theirs, but I can’t agree that it wouldn’t be better if that distress could be prevented.

How is this different from attempting to make gay people "reconcile" with their "reproductive role"?

Mavalon

Yes but she is obviously talking about ‘people’ who have long lives ahead of them - adolescents and young adults.

Yes, children grow up.

‘Helen Joyce very clearly expressed the sentiment that the decision should be made for them, regardless of their wishes.’

In what part of what she said did she say that?

‘She was very clear that "raising awareness" is "irrelevant", and that it's about "getting through to the decision makers".’

Influencing policy makers in a democracy by talking to them and persuading them to your point of view? I think that’s how it has to be done, isn’t it?

I’ve just listened again and she is talking about very young transitioners, and the ‘things’ those people will need for the next sixty to seventy years of their lives: ie permanent medication and specialist care. I don’t think she is talking about forcibly preventing any adult from transitioning.

In the clip that's being shared she says 'people' eight times and 'children' once

Whether or not that’s offensive to you depends on your philosophical standpoint with regards to gender, I guess. If you believe in gender identity it will be offensive. If you believe the young transitioners have been duped, the idea of turning them into lifelong medical patients is probably more offensive.

Exactly.

@tabbycatstripy you forgot a third cohort.

If you think that people with gender dysphoria, confusion require and deserve informed medical treatment then it will all sound like common sense.

Helen Joyce very clearly expressed the sentiment that the decision should be made for them, regardless of their wishes.

She was very clear that "raising awareness" is "irrelevant", and that it's about "getting through to the decision makers".

Helen J said we should aim to reduce the amount of people transitioning to alleviate their distress, by promoting their reconciliation to their sex. Predictably, the absolutely despicable 'Joss Prior' considers this fascism - so?

Also, that little grifter LOJ only got 3,700 likes for his inflammatory tweet out of his 1mn followers. Seems this particular brand of misogyny is losing its power.

It's a wetransfer link, although your point is fair as it could be a malicious file.

Hopefully this works

Just a warning to be careful about clicking on random links.

I’ve just listened again and she is talking about very young transitioners, and the ‘things’ those people will need for the next sixty to seventy years of their lives: ie permanent medication and specialist care. I don’t think she is talking about forcibly preventing any adult from transitioning.

Whether or not that’s offensive to you depends on your philosophical standpoint with regards to gender, I guess. If you believe in gender identity it will be offensive. If you believe the young transitioners have been duped, the idea of turning them into lifelong medical patients is probably more offensive.

Hopefully this works

we.tl/t-fleI5h1eRp

Someone regretting their choices doesn't mean everyone should be stripped of the ability to make those choices.

That isn't what I said, nor, from my knowledge of these two women, is it what they have said.

I included the words 'unquestioning affirmation' and the idea that those for whom treatment has not worked will provide good data for improving services. Just as they do in every other field of medicine.

Why do you think being trans is so different? Why don't normal rules, safety guidelines apply?

Someone regretting their choices doesn't mean everyone should be stripped of the ability to make those choices.

Which choices? Medical transition? Where is the evidence base that it works in the long term? If it's not a medical condition, why would it be covered by the NHS?

Lots of parents out there who would "prefer" their child to be straight rather than gay too.

The parents' preferences don't matter.

Children aren't their parents' property, and they don't exist to fulfill their parents' wishes.

It's worth watching it all, they make some great points. If you watch it it's very clear that no one is advocating "genocide", and I agree with pp that that term should not be appropriated for hyperbole purposes.

Someone regretting their choices doesn't mean everyone should be stripped of the ability to make those choices.

I've now gleaned that there isn't a full transcription of the conversation.

Beyond that, I have to acknowledge that Owen Jones has deployed a very successful strategy. Nobody is talking about his behaviour to his colleagues at the Guardian nor his offer to hear the 'other side of the story' from the young women in the recent story about the schoolgirl who was ostracised following her challenge to the Baroness who spoke at her school.

In truth, it is pathetic that someone chose to do this. Anyone who has read Helen's book knows her position, which is very far removed from the distortion that is being circulated.

The fact that some have pounced on that distortion with such aggression is intended to impede the free speech of others. The message is: "don't speak bluntly; only use words that we find acceptable or this is what happens to you".

TRAs hate her because she is such a rational, credible speaker on this issue. They very much want to discredit her. They first tried to claim she was an antisemite because she pointed out where the main funding comes from in the trans movement.

As a parent, would you prefer that your child suffering with gender dysphoria a) reconciles to their sex b) cuts off their fully functioning body parts and becomes life-long medical patient? It is not transphobic to fervently wish, hope, and do everything in your power to achieve outcome a). It is not good or healthy for society to normalise dissociation from and hatred of your body, and to promote medical solutions for the resulting distress. If my disabled daughter's disability could be alleviated by therapy, I promise to you that I would not agree to an operation on a 4-week old, and numerous operations since

And of course we bloody try to minimise the amount of people born with life-threatening disabilities that would make them life-long patients, by giving women the right to choose to have children who've been diagnosed in-vitro or not. Should we stop that then, and make women have children with severe disabilities?