What exactly has Andrew Neil done?

TBF it's probably easier for women to believe that healthcare isn't always in their best interests. We know our pain/incontinence/brain fog/mental health is taken less seriously.

If you were of the default human class, you might not believe the extent to which women are dismissed until you see it.

He is warning Andrew Neil that doctors simply wouldn't be performing these surgeries or prescribing the medications, without it being the best thing for the child. And is under the impression that the input of parents, doctors, psychologists, etc, can't all be wrong.

Possibly off-topic, but I find this quite a common attitude to all sorts of things doctors do, not just gender medicine. Years ago I once had a medical problem that was misdiagnosed, followed by a hospital doctor proposing drastically wrong treatment (luckily I ended up seeing a consultant before this could happen). I remember telling a friend about it, and she basically refused to believe me, saying I must have misunderstood the doctor. This despite the fact that both she and I are intelligent, educated women.

Yet if you decide to listen to other people's experiences, or even read newspaper reports, then you'll find that doctors get things dramatically wrong all the time, and then the hospital covers up for them. This is a fairly recent example, but there are a ton of others:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-65904293

So it's not entirely surprising that people refuse to believe that doctors are giving young people dangerous drugs or performing harmful surgeries on them. They simply think that that's not the way doctors behave.

Yes, exactly. Wes Streeting actively harassed and organised against Labour Party women, as PP described upthread. That’s very different from ignoring the issue.

And I am very happy that some people are happy with Labour’s supposed change. However, only time will tell if this is just wishful thinking. And I am not allowing myself to be be convinced by weasel words that seem to be very weak.

I prefer media that is impartial too. However, having someone who has shown he can be impartial on topics is good to have. It means that he will push back on the fuckwittery and may get it show the reality. Like in Sky News the other week.

For me it is about getting voices heard and heard together. If he can get White on with say Naomi Cunningham or Anya Palmer or Akua Reindorf, that would be great.

Or Montgomery on with Kathleen Stock or Emma Hilton.

or just interview Montgomery or Webberly or Nancy Kelley or White any who hold extreme views.

Now he's on board, Andrew Neil needs to challenge the GMC & the BMA.

Once the medical establishment pay attention to the massive risks around this, I imagine there will be few Drs willing to be a single signatory.

See also insurance companies.

Single doctor? That's the weakest part of this proposal. It's also the reason it will never be delivered. I'm sure that the BMA will oppose it. No doctor unless they are a fanatic will want this responsibility alone. And while you do have such fanatics there are not enough of them.

I’m not going to refuse support on this issue from people I otherwise disagree with.

Exactly. And vice versa - I had a browse through Susie Green’s Twitter feed a few months ago (when it was still possible) and I agree with her on almost everything. It’s just her transitioning zealotry that I disagree with.

I don’t think they’ll have much choice

Not that Dodds has turned up to explain the form they’ll have to fill out and questions asked

No. We need the media to be impartial. And in the present climate that would look like defending women’s rights, because up till now most news sources have supported the trans movement. Look at the BBC and Guardian over the past few years. A cowardly disgrace.

Most of the left/liberal press has dumped women. I’m not going to refuse support on this issue from people I otherwise disagree with.

It is. But I wonder how many would be willing to hand out diagnoses like Smarties.

@ResisterRex - while you are right I can see the political "journey" which is to back out of this asap.

Dodds needs to say something. She would not necessarily even be in charge of this area if elected, nor can she guarantee that she can enact it. The proposal smells of political mothballs.

It’s any GP isn’t it?

Exactly. She'll be retired in under a year. Plus, can you imagine how many more Webbley's will be spring up?

The problem for me is that I can't tell yet whether Self ID is dead or whether it's been given a rebrand.

Bit ridiculous that women need 2 Dr's to approve their abortion but men can transition with just 1 - and even that is going to be a step too far for TRAs

Yes agree

Well if that one doctor is Webberly then that’s her pension all sorted.

A Dr as in any local GP?

On what basis is that a system that counts

A male turns up in a skirt and then what?

Self-ID might not be dead. Dodds wants to change the panel requirements to one Dr. Well, how is that person qualified and who will oversee it? We all know there are ways to circumvent such a system - if you can call that a system.

But his non views are typical and representative of the average person, i'd say.

He was a respondent Andrew Neil's twitter account - trying to put him right, but not actually having a clue what he was talking about.

(His bio left me none the wiser)

Who is Jim? I saw all that and answered a bit . Now that anyone can pay for a blue tick and as I don't recognise him I wasn't sure if his views particularly mattered

It's a good thing and I think I was told on here that the Labour Party would never change its position. Well they have, and are well on the way to doing absolutely nothing. Self ID is dead in England. Scotland depends on the SNP and their desperate action against the UK government which will fail too.

Andrew Neill getting stuck in is good. He does his homework, unlike some.

Btw I also note that the party really responsible for this mess, ie the Conservatives, have done nothing but draft some unlawful guidance, which, if it had gone ahead, would have been judicially reviewed and made matters far worse for those who oppose self ID.

Enjoying the lack of "blah what is a woman" and more "what is politics". This is what it looks like.