What you all said was coming

The 'reap what you sow' posters are really proving the point, in my opinion. As are the comments on the Daily Mail article.

Most people understand that cutting off a man's penis is utterly horrifying. It's their shock and fear talking.

"Of course cutting off a penis is going to have far-reaching implications, not just surgical, but emotional and mental".

You can hear the 'durs' from space.

It's extremely difficult for people to understand the ideology that leads a young man to want to cut off probably the most important part of his anatomy.

How many people can grasp that this man would have been told, year in year out, everywhere he turned, that he wasn't a man, and his body was wrong. And if he only changes his body, everything will be righted. Balance restored. Issues eliminated. To the point where cutting off his actual penis sounds not just sensible, but desirable.

Even the bloody NHS talks about his forthcoming vagina, clitoris and labia. He's never going to have a vagina, a clitoris, or any labia. Ever. It's not possible. They're lying.

People say he should have done his research. There are reams and reams of narratives online, all telling him it's the right decision.

A poster up thread used the word funnelling. And it's exactly that. He would been funnelled down a path to exactly this outcome. Everywhere he turned.

He regretted it immediately. Fucking immediately! Mentally, before he went onto the operating table, his mind was a total mess. Because as soon as he realised what he'd done, everything crystallised.

But.

The NHS, also believe all of this. They believe trans women are women. They talk about a mutilated penis being a vagina. They are complicit. They are captured across the board. And it needs a massive investigation.

The reason the below the line comments are blaming him is because they will not fully appreciate that the NHS were right behind him.

I bet none of them realise that the NHS deliberately denied a rape took place because the man who did it said he was a woman. I bet none of them realise that the NHS are trained to say there are no men on this ward, if those men tell them to.

It's quite a normal reaction to say what the fuck was he thinking. Because what the fuck are they all thinking

It isn’t a false dichotomy. I was born female with unevenly sized breasts which I find very distressing. The NHS regards this as cosmetic and won’t even them up. But they’re happy to put breasts on a male.

That was difficult to read and I’m sorry for the harm Tulip suffered and continued to struggle with.

This is what happens when ideology is allowed to interfere in medicine and psychology. WPATH creates guidance based on little evidence and written by a small number of people, some with a vested interest. It’s joined with ‘Inclusion’ and ‘Diversity’ in non clinical areas so that affirmation is presented as the evidence based route to treat people with Gender Dysphoria. It’s removed from classification as a mental disorder and any doctor or psychologist saying otherwise is open to accusations of transphobia and potential threats to their livelihood. pressure groups, for their own ends, push this further, threaten and coerce professional bodies to go further. Those afraid for their jobs or too apathetic or naive or too busy to look into it more say nothing and those in thrall to the ideology or keen to be seen as experimental trailblazers come to the fore and the narrative is pushed further.
Vulnerable people are swept up in it. Their unhappiness drives them to push for the thing they’re being sold as a cure all but really isn’t. They think they know what they want, what they’re told they need and anyone arguing against it or urging caution is transphobic, a bigot, and hates them. Maybe they’re told the risks and don’t care or don’t care to listen or consider it might be them. After all, everyone else who had it was fine so why not them? Or perhaps the surgeon so keen to try out new techniques or too afraid to be seen as critical minimises the risks. And it’s only afterwards that reality hits.

We don’t know what happened, how much Tulip pushed for surgery, was convinced of his dysphoria and this the only treatment. We don’t know if the surgeon sold him a pipe dream and minimised the risks. If gender dysphoria is no longer a mental illness then how can the patient have impaired capacity? I guess that will come out in court.

For me what is true is that ideology must never be allowed again to replace evidence when it comes to medical decisions.

And for those quick to judge either side you don’t know what it’s like if you’re not in it.

If a womans breasts are so large they leave her in constant pain and unable to function properly then it is medically indicated that a reduction nay ne beneficial.

As fir circumcision. Absolutely not. Baby boys should not have their penises surgically altered unless medically necessary

Do they not do childhood circumcision on the NHS, or breast reduction surgery?

This.

I say - "We cannot consent to this". Adult or child. Anyone who wants it, almost by definition shouldn't have it.

Quite.

The issue of consent is an interesting legal area. We insist, for example, that a 15-year old can't consent to sex, even if that 15-year old is a willing partner.

Similarly, people can't legally "consent" to being murdered or being harmed. There was a famous case several years ago in which a group of men were successfully prosecuted for participating in consensual sadomasochistic sex.

So in what sense can someone legally "consent" to having a perfectly healthy body part removed?

Trans-regret has been a 'thing' for many years now. Dr James Caspian proposed undertaking research into it as so many cases were coming forward. His university refused to fund it because it was 'politically incorrect'.

The NHS, along with almost all our top institutions have been completely mind snatched by an extreme lobby, and innocent people are suffering terrible mutilation as a result. Not only that but they are then told to shut up and go away if they are unhappy

The fact that there is virtually no NHS provision of treatment for trans regret speaks volumes, the people who want to push this barbaric practice have so much influence but they must be a tiny group you just ask why?

Why does our 'government' (I mean that in a totally non-party political sense, ie all our institutions, civil service, NHS, universities etc) people who should be looking at the whole picture and asking difficult questions in order to protect the citizens of this country, just roll over and give in to them? Not only are they refusing to allow any criticism, but are standing by while those who are brave enough to stand up and fight are thrown to the dogs.

Here is a link to the Caspian story.

The DM comments were not very sympathetic towards Keira, iirc. In her case, the Judicial Review aspect went straight over their heads and they just saw her as someone who wanted to have her cake and eat it. Even though she had been so young - there was a lot of "you can't keep chopping and changing and blaming others", as well as general sighs of "why does the NHS spend money on this nonsense". Basically a baffled "world's gone mad" vibe. Really hope detransitioners can find the professional support they need when going public.

It's sad to think that they came after him on twitter.

It's arguable that the same people who contrive to have women deplatformed on Twitter might overlap with those who are opposed to publicity for detransitioner testimonies and who might respond with unhelpful/unsupportive comments.

The NHS doesn't remove any other healty body parts upon request, so wtf do they remove genitals? It's absurd and obscene.

Sueing the NHS won't give this poor sod his body back, but if it makes the NHS rethink their approach to these surgeries that's a win for everyone and a large part of what we're all fighting for.

My concern is that anyone who has transitioned and detransitioned is a vulnerable person with various mental health issues.

The lawsuits need to happen, but it will take extraordinary mental resilience and fortitude. I am worried that a lot of detransitioners won't feel up to the task or may find it too difficult when things get going. Still, Keira Bell seems to have coped, so there is hope.

I think the age difference is a big part of it. Keira was a child.

Our tenant had the surgery decades ago as did another person we knew it was a slow careful process as you said taken slowly

It's arguable that any detransitioners who are going public right now need a media & comms strategy.

This came up in the Benjamin Boyce interview. Sinead Watson was very clear that she was in no way prepared for the tsunami of interest and contact after she went public. She doesn't regret her initial interview with Boyce but she now recognises that she wasn't really in the appropriate emotional or cognitive space to deal with all the attendant interest and cope with the early stages of the process of detransitioning at that time.

Watson said she'd been contacted by a number of MtF detransitioners who said that they felt that they should go public but couldn't. Tulip is one of the handful who has. It's an open question as to how to handle all of publicity and controversy as well as living with the detransition and the consequences of previous interventions.

I hope he finds some peace. My heart breaks for him. I don't understand why some people empathise with Keira Bell, yet are so vitriolic about Tulip. No wonder people suffer in silence. I always think back to Julia Grant, lived nearly their whole life not admitting their surgery was a disaster, that they lost all sexual function, because they felt such shame. And as we've said for years the only way this will be resolved in some way is through the courts, money talks. Ask the victims of the vaginal mesh scandal.

Tullip has reactia his Twitter and says he asked them to take it down:

twitter.com/tullipr/status/1540307782234152965?s=21&t=A1oh8j5FpFyo7JvdPyQX6g

“I asked them too, and they did it quickly.

They were reporting off the back of Daily Mail, which though has a few inaccuracies isn't terrible in the long run.

I also read the comments...you should never read the comments...

Times says that the article has been removed, no explanation.

What happened? None of the links are working?

Gender reassignment surgery is not new a Miss Evans was doing this at our hospital decades ago.

Way back then, I gather that people who wanted SRS had to have extensive psychological assessment beforehand, 'live as the desired sex for 2 years' (setting aside what that means) and other such forms of gatekeeping.

Following representations that this was unnecessary gatekeeping, the adult model has shifted to affirmation in the context of adequate capacity to consent (for whatever that means for an assessment of somebody's mental health and the assessment of gender dysphoria that can be alleviated through various measures).

www.thefreelibrary.com/Viva+!%3A+She+gives+new+life+to+wheelchair-bound+kids%2C+helps...-a0100915515

Miss Evans a caring pioneer who didn't hold back

Gender reassignment surgery is not new a Miss Evans was doing this at our hospital decades ago. He was 23 when he heard about this 25 when they operated so not that young. It's sad and proves that many can be confused about their sexuality he was badly advised by so called experts so should sue but not for money but exposure of this murky shabby practice.

It's mutilation and should be acknowledged as such by surgeons

That list does it really say "What CAN happen?"

If that's what is says he has have stronger argument. Because really most of that stuff is what WILL happen. Can in my head means it might happen but unlikely. Loss of sexual function is more than a it might happen.

Bottom line, why is the NHS paying for people's bodies to have healthy bits removed.
The NHS is stretched enough without spending £££ on unnecessary operations.

I do hope he wins his case because the more people come out against this tide the quicker it will turn.

Preparing for the action and defending it would be very costly. It would also take up a lot of clinical time if individual HCPs are named and have to provide depositions etc.