Telegraph: ‘Sturgeon’s Tavistock’ clinic offers trans treatments not backed by ‘robust evidence’

The comments under the Telegraph article !

Although 'What's worn under the kilt? Nothing, it's all been surgically removed.' Did give me a grim chuckle.

Nine years old? It’s state-sanctioned child abuse.

Shudder, yes you're right.

And one could probably get banned from MN coming up with a very long list of other words that most on here would regard as fair.

Think the term for someone who forces rape victims to describe their rape to a man is trauma voyeur / sadist.

When are doctors going to realise that it’s completely normal, even expected, for girls to be upset about growing breasts and starting periods? Doesn’t mean chop them off and sterilise us!

Arabella. The rape crisis centre CEO does not have a GRC. They are on record as liking to sit in on counselling sessions. This person recommends that traumatised women who want to use the centre's services must not object to males being present, even if the presence of a male is triggering. And in fact, a triggered, trauma response is bigoted and the woman must reframe their trauma, sorry, "unacceptable beliefs" or be declined assistance.
Aren't they a nice person?
[Heart eyes] /sarcasm

And in the comments:

'The journalist cites an example of a rape victim not being guaranteed a safe space at a rape crisis centre? How can this be? I thought I would check this matter out a bit further to see what I came up with and it transpired the rape crisis centre in Edinburgh is run by a man who identifies as a woman. He dresses as an Asian women but has a penis. Our Scots government employ him. Tell me Im imagining this stuff because I wish I was and it was not true.'

'Reasonably-minded Scots believe there is room for transgender rights to be protected alongside women’s rights to safe spaces and their protected, sex-based characteristics.

The Scottish Government though is effectively saying that we can’t have both and that women’s rights must be sacrificed. It is effectively seeking to create a two-tier system of human rights where to be a woman living in Scotland is to be denied many of the rights men enjoy.'

From the Herald article above

And this

www.heraldscotland.com/opinion/23088774.snp-assault-womens-rights-shames-scotland/

If you’d asked me a year ago if I’d be googling to find that out… yeah. Ridiculous. And yet here we are. 🤷🏻‍♀️

Thanks, Sudocrem. I think.

I agree that emasculation is a very problematic.

Penectomy and bilateral or orchiectomy does not make someone less male. It just removes some body parts that only male humans have.

Removal of the penis is penectomy.

'Surgical removal of the testicles (orchiectomy)' - but there's also penis removal. Which I just cba googling, tbh.

Emasculation?

'Emasculation is the removal of both the penis and the testicles, the external male sex organs. It differs from castration, which is the removal of the testicles only, although the terms are sometimes used interchangeably.[1] The potential medical consequences of emasculation are more extensive than those associated with castration, as the removal of the penis gives rise to a unique series of complications. There are a range of religious, cultural, punitive, and personal reasons why someone may choose to emasculate themselves or another person. Consensual emasculation may be seen as a form of body modification that enhances a recipient's identification with their community or sense of self. By comparison, non-consensual emasculations, such as those performed punitively or accidentally, may constitute genital mutilation. The medical treatment for an emasculated person differs depending on whether the procedure was consensual.' (wiki)

The obvious trouble is 'emasculation's other (more commonly used) meaning.

Let’s go with ‘penectomy with bilateral orchiectomy’ then.

I don’t see how anyone can legitimately object to the actual medical terms for these procedures.

Using the medical terminology possibly has the added advantage that it doesn’t euphemise how invasive and medicalised this is. It’s not a minor thing.

If MN doesn't want us to use the c-word, how about 'genital ablation'? Though that, to me, sounds worse.

I can’t remember which podcast I listened to about the Eunuch Archives (vaguely thinking it was Genevieve Gluck with Glinner or someone like Benjamin Boyce)

Something that strikes me even from the criticism of whistleblowers is that the idea of ‘evidence-based practice’ is seriously distorted in all things trans. It seems to be practice seeking out evidence in the service of enabling the existing practice (and the demands of activists). When it should be practice that emerges from and responds to thorough systematic review of the best possible evidence.

The whole thing has horribly confused user wants with user needs in incredibly dangerous ways. A very vulnerable person - particularly a child - who is seeking to
address issues in their life by making irreversible changes to their body with lifelong negative effects is most certainly not someone whose current wants are at all aligned with their needs. unquestioning affirmation and fast tracking intervention actually makes it much, much harder to meet their needs.

It’s terrifying. And an emblematic example of what happens when you try to solve a problem defined on the basis of wildly inaccurate assumptions. And what happens when powerful interest groups are determined to thwart any attempt to question or challenge the assumptions that serve their purposes.

Yes that was G Gluck

I can’t remember which podcast I listened to about the Eunuch Archives (vaguely thinking it was Genevieve Gluck with Glinner or someone like Benjamin Boyce) but the feminist who infiltrated the protected site and accessed the CSA-related content said it was really disturbing, but apparently not outlawed in the US because it is written, not image-based. ☹️

Agree