Active discussions

Please or to access all these features

Talk
Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

Feminism: chat

Original poster

So angry about everyone not commenting on Cass review

81 replies

NameChangeAgainandOncemore · 13/04/2024 14:44

Since Cass came out I have been slightly obsessively checking the SM feeds of celebs and other public figures who have been vocal in dissing JK Rowling over trans issues. I want them all to say they agree that single sex spaces and sports are required and that men should perhaps not be admitted even if they put on a dress / chop off their dick.

I am also keeping an eye on those who turned their back on Graham Linehan when he raised concerns over transing children, all of which have now been pretty much proved right.

SILENCE

Trans ideology is rightwing, conformist, anti-science bullshit, and they know it now even if they didn't before.

What a relief to finally say it, since I've been too scared to say it in rl. Still too scared:

Can I say it to my best friend who has transed her child with testosterone? NO because that kid will be under medical supervision forever, with unknown, probably cancerous consequences, and the guilt would be crushing for her, probably is already.

Can I say it to my ex teacher who is crowdfunding for mastectomy for her teenage child? NO because they are convinced it will fix the eating disorder and the social anxiety since the kid has said they will kill themselves if they can't have it.

Can I say it to the five young adult females who I watched transing themselves over the past ten years, all of whom I knew in my bones were lesbians, most with autistic tendencies, three of whom I suspected of having been exposed to sex too early? NO. It is heartbreaking to see them and what they have done to their bodies, under the care of medics, with no help whatsoever for their mental health issues or trauma.

Can I say it to my ex friend who stated I was a TERF and a bigot after I pointed out my reasons for having huge concerns over medical transition of children? NO because she doesn't speak to me any more and her best mate is a TW who cannot stop pouting for some reason.

FUMING

OP posts:
New posts on this thread. Refresh page
Original poster
NameChangeAgainandOncemore · 22/04/2024 06:44

@Notaflippinclue me too, very leftie. And it took a while for me to see it this way, because at first I was an ally, like many of us.

The point is that Trans ideology is hiding under a banner of "left wing", pretending to be something we as reasonable, accepting people cannot question due to the historical weight of guilt at the undermining of gay rights and rights for people of various faiths and ethnicities. We accepted Trans, because it LOOKS almost exactly like something we ought to accept on the basis that it's exactly the same as those things, and to reject it would make us 'Right Wing'. This is why the Greens, Labour, most comedians have been captured by it.

But even with other faiths, extreme body modification is now condemned (EG FGM), and while in the West gay people are mostly accepted, they are still stoned to death under religious laws in some countries (EG Iran. Side note, in Iran, trans is fine, the government will pay for your surgery). In the West, we've rolled Trans in with those identifiers that need to be accepted and protected, and not noticed until it's too late that although it looks similar to other diverse communities, it is very backward and based on magical thinking and mental ill health (all accusations and justifications for oppression leveled at the gay community at one time)

Many people on the left are yet to peak, but they need to start. In unquestioningly accepting Trans ideology, as a society we are allowing men to indecently expose themselves (Jorday Gray) and other men to inflict mental torture on victims of rape (referring to rapists as 'she') and encouraging body modification of the most extreme kind in children. I hope Cass causes some to wake up and, even if quietly, change their minds.

OP posts:
songaboutjam · 22/04/2024 00:11

Parties can adopt and be inherently associated with positions that are the traditional bread and butter of the other side.

As an economic policy, immigration control used to be considered left wing due to high immigration making wages, job competition, and exploitation worse for workers. It is now much more associated with the right, but on a purely economic level the reasoning remains near identical. The one thing that changes is the social framing.

On a basic level, gender ideology is very socially conservative and is underpinned by an idea of "real men" and "real women". It concerns itself with the rights of the individual over the rights of the collective - - hardly surprising since modern gender theory came straight out of US culture. It delegitimises the concept of same sex attraction, and relies on a capitalistic free market to access whatever surgery or hormones are requested.

As with immigration control, it's all about the social framing.

Notaflippinclue · 21/04/2024 19:53

I can only speak for myself and consider myself very terfy I'm a a member of POW and if you're thinking politics and the trans debate then Labour & the Greens both think women have a penis - personally I don't I must be right wing.

Original poster
NameChangeAgainandOncemore · 21/04/2024 19:25

@Notaflippinclue can you elaborate? Seems to be quite a good argument here for trans ideology being inherently right wing (rejection of gender non conforming people by insisting they are somehow in the wrong body, to be fixed only by body modification.)

What's your counter argument, genuinely interested

OP posts:
Notaflippinclue · 19/04/2024 04:11

Right wing? Pwahahaha - tommyrot

HornyHornersPinkyWinky · 15/04/2024 13:23

Along the lines of, we were right about the Tavi's mal practice and this validates the other positions we hold. On Twitter, there are lots of comments along these lines.
I agree that single sex provision should be determined by natal sex, that no-one should be required (or even expected) to use preferred pronouns etc. but I don't think this report can be used in relation to this - it doesn't provide evidence for this.

I disagree Brainworm, all of those things are linked to the central lies of gender ideology - that human's can change sex, that an inner essence can somehow overwrite biology etc.
What the Cass report showed is that there is no good evidence or outcomes to support this. The whole package of gender ideology relies on a foundation of lies, and transing children is a natural outworking of that. To say it is not connected is wrong in my opinion. Why shouldn't we point that out?

The world of medicine is more clear cut/ objective.
It's not though is it? If you look back through history there are countless examples of doctors and surgeons doing awful things in the name of 'medicine'. Additionally, our idea of what constitutes a treatment or cure for something is in some ways dependent on culture and society - it's known as the symptom pool.
In the 19th century if young girls presented to their doctors with symptoms of distress they would have likely been diagnosed with 'hysteria' - a cure for which was sometimes removal of the ovaries (sounds familiar to what is happening now).

Brainworm · 15/04/2024 09:23

Such as? (Over-generalisation and which groups are doing it to what end?) Is this on TwiX?

Along the lines of, we were right about the Tavi's mal practice and this validates the other positions we hold. On Twitter, there are lots of comments along these lines.

I agree that single sex provision should be determined by natal sex, that no-one should be required (or even expected) to use preferred pronouns etc. but I don't think this report can be used in relation to this - it doesn't provide evidence for this.

The review didn't look into how society should be organised for adults, or even children who aren't experiencing distress.

The world of medicine is more clear cut/ objective. Deciding how society should be organised will always come down to opinion and preferences. Philosophy provides a framework for evaluating arguments, and we can collect evidence relating to specific outcomes (objective- such as health and wealth, or subjective- such as happiness) but disagreement is still likely to ensue (e.g which outcomes should we prioritise).

Original poster
NameChangeAgainandOncemore · 15/04/2024 09:13

I know I said trans was a right-wing ideology but really it's everywhere, that's why it's so difficult to see it for what it is. That's why those who consider themselves 'lefties' are so convinced they are in the right camp, and those who know they are right-wing think that their natural tendency to be ok with transing children makes them somehow more palatable to the general leftie crowd. Insidious.

The 'left' see trans people as those who are a little bit different, outsiders perhaps, part of the LGBTQ crowd and embrace them as such

The 'right' see trans people as people living their best lives in an individualistic way, exercising their rights where it serves them and conforming to gender norms at the same time.

win win lose lose

I agree somewhat with @Brainworm about GC people using the review to over generalise (which I just did above haha). Lots of the GC have viewed it as an opportunity to bash the trans community in general, Graham Linehan for example, though I have a soft spot for him I do think he can shoot himself in the foot on occasion by not rising above certain things

OP posts:
RethinkingLife · 15/04/2024 09:00

Editorials in The Times point to culpability from the medical professionals, something which Cass I believe skirts around.

Cass could not have written this any other way without being enmeshed in a professional stramash with the Royal Colleges, Unions, members of relevant committees and working groups, clinicians involved in any upcoming trials etc. Criticism in the report was neither within her terms of reference (I'd need to check to be wholly confident of this) nor politically appropriate to the overall task.

RethinkingLife · 15/04/2024 08:56

I think within the GC community there are also groups who are over generalising the review to make claims beyond those Cass makes.

Such as? (Over-generalisation and which groups are doing it to what end?) Is this on TwiX?

Brainworm · 15/04/2024 08:50

I find the TRAs objecting to the report as falling into 3 broad camps:

  1. the genuinely ignorant who fail to understand that/why criteria for undertaking systematic reviews relating to medical practice set a higher bar than other disciplines and that Cass followed the standards followed across all areas of medicine

  2. the 'I went to Bernard Castle to test my eye sight' crew who are simply focussed on ignoring or discrediting the review. Here, it's simply a matter of doggedly 'keep on keeping on' with our agenda.

  3. those who are susceptible to believing that the review is part of an agenda to further marginalise an already marginalised group. That like asylum seekers, there is a right wing vendetta to get rid of them.

I think within the GC community there are also groups who are over generalising the review to make claims beyond those Cass makes.

Original poster
NameChangeAgainandOncemore · 15/04/2024 08:42

@Fenimore they are rejecting it based on their ignorance of the research methods.

They are basically parroting another lie, that this research is flawed - not only claiming that studies were rejected based on them not being valid (yes and?). The whole point is that there is not enough research of good enough quality to justify slicing up children and giving them horrendous drugs

Also they have started shrieking that citations are somehow invalid since they aren't whatever sources it is these idiots think ought to be cited (youtube videos are cited. OF COURSE THEY ARE YOU IDIOTS since I shouldn't have to spell out to anyone that research papers cite EVERYTHING they encounter in order to validate the research, including Wikipedia, including talking heads who know nothing, so you can see where the fucking citation is and whether you ought to pay any serious attention to it)

So frustrating

OP posts:
Fenimore · 15/04/2024 08:26

Unfortunately some are rejecting it on the basis of the research used.

OnHerSolidFoundations · 15/04/2024 08:23

Why not post the link in their comments on Twitter OP & ask them what they think?

FrancescaContini · 15/04/2024 08:20

Boombatty · 13/04/2024 17:59

I'm waiting (not so) patiently for the he/hims and she/hers to quietly drop off email signatures. I suspect it might take some time though.

And for the rainbows to fade away especially in education and healthcare settings. This can’t come fast enough.

Thanks for starting this thread, @NameChangeAgainandOncemore It’s very powerful to hear your anger: many women share it.

Original poster
NameChangeAgainandOncemore · 14/04/2024 22:57

@Fieldofgreycorn I don't think the best outcome for any CHILD would be transition. Sorry but no.

"Transition," since we can't be talking here about changing from one set of conformist sexist tropes of gender norms to another (for example by growing / cutting hair, wearing different clothes or being interested in vehicles as opposed to shopping) implies, in terms of 'healthcare', firstly drugs that cause damage of unknown severity, followed by amputation of body parts and forcing young bodies to adapt to cross sex hormones.

I don't actually believe this is the best outcome for any human but I don't care what grown adults do with their bodies.

I understand that children who believe they are in the wrong sexed body are in a difficult position, and that puberty may be distressing for someone who is distressed by the idea of the potential of their own sexed adulthood, but that is the position they are in, and as children they should be protected from harm. No amount of surgery or drugs will change them into someone with a different sexed body. They should be helped to cope with it, and treated for the psychological condition that they have, discouraged from harming themselves and encouraged to accept the reality they are in.

Being homosexual was once viewed as unnatural or some kind of 'choice', perhaps even a psychological condition that could be treated with conversion therapy. We know now that it's natural, and those who are homosexual are encouraged to embrace their natural selves, their natural bodies.

Trans ideology is the opposite of that. It's a rejection of reality, and of the natural self. It erases homosexuality, and peddles the lie that sexed bodies can be changed.

OP posts:
Musomama1 · 14/04/2024 21:37

NameChangeAgainandOncemore · 13/04/2024 15:38

Daniel Radcliffe, in his initial denounciation of Jo Rowling stated that he had based his opinions on 'advice given by professional health care associations who have far more expertise on this subject matter than either Jo or I'

Well, turns out they didn't know as much as Jo, who said so at the time, very eloquently.

If they can be arsed to write huge great essays saying trans ideology is fine can't they just hint that maybe they were wrong though, now that it turns out they were so obviously, idiotically wrong?

I think actually that Baroness Hunt has changed her tune, and apart from the fact that she's pretending she wasn't totally captured in the first place, I welcome a climbdown, and even an about turn, if people end up facing the right way in the end. Better than the digging in of heels that is coming from people like India bloody Willoughby, who is to be fair rather over-invested in trans being the height of cultural superiority, since they have castrated themselves at the altar of it.

Yes I love that observation. Editorials in The Times point to culpability from the medical professionals, something which Cass I believe skirts around.

Doctors as it turned out didn't know, I'm sure most of them really didn't want to know and just referred kids to a gender clinic waiting list. Not doing their job essentially.

Will Radcliffe understand this? The biggest piece of research on this, years in the making from an eminent paediatrician who is now an expert in this field. And gender clinics refusing to share their data!

Will it ever trickle in? I wish this would be a wake up call, at the very least the NHS needs to be utterly uncaptured which I think would be a turning point.

FigRollsAlly · 14/04/2024 18:28

Victoria Atkins was on Sky this morning too but Trevor Phillips, like Laura K, asked mainly about Iran and nothing about Cass. They both asked briefly about banning cigarettes sales to those born in or after 2009 (?) though. Disappointing.

ooooohnoooooo · 14/04/2024 16:18

@LogicLoverLlama @MrsOvertonsWindow Thankyou both.

EwwSprouts · 14/04/2024 10:45

Victoria Atkins, secretary of state for health, was on LK this morning but LK only asked her questions about Iran. Yes, that is hugely important but LK made time to cover secondary issues with other interviewees. Victoria Atkins managed to drop in at the end that 'protecting children was a Conservative value', which I perceived as an allusion to Cass.

Fieldofgreycorn · 14/04/2024 09:20

Trans ideology is rightwing, conformist, anti-science bullshit, and they know it now even if they didn't before.
What a relief to finally say it, since I've been too scared to say it in rl. Still too scared:
Can I say it to my best friend who has transed her child with testosterone?

The Cass review is addressing one thing, healthcare for gender dysphoric children.

She clearly states the report is not about undermining trans identities.

She states there is broad agreement that gender incongruence is a result of a complex interplay between biological, psychological and social factors.

She also states that for some the best outcome will be transition.

Sometimeswinning · 14/04/2024 00:30

Betweenthe2 · 13/04/2024 17:36

OP, I mean this kindly, please take a break from checking social media and go outside. It's a lovely day. Other people wlll post what they want. Spending your day fuming because they haven't posted what you want isn't good for your mental health and a waste of your energy.

Show quote history

Yes women should just go play out in the sunshine and not think about any of this tricky stuff!

I’m with the op. I’d love to know what the likes of EW has to say. Someone who handed over their money to Mermaids so proudly may like to explain their thinking.

BusyMummy001 · 13/04/2024 23:32

@RethinkingLife well, there was supposed to be Mermaids…

but there’s a parent support group, Bayswater, and recently TransgenderTrend has been around. But it’s mainly online, anonymous. GP/Counselling services have been towing the line so until the Cass Report it’s been impossible to expose yourself as GC/non-affirming without risking censure by them and visits from social services which, from personal experience, are deeply invasive and stressful.

Hoping there will be more support now and more freedom to be open about how we feel.

RethinkingLife · 13/04/2024 23:27

It’s been a lonely 6 years. I suspect those of us in the trenches have a fair few more to go, even if our kids recover eventually. They can’t give us back those years or give my child her innocence and her teenage years back. I will never forgive them.

Forgive my ignorance. Is there an organisation or support group for parents in your position/predicament?

BusyMummy001 · 13/04/2024 23:11

I suspect all the celebs etc are ducking for cover and taking PR advice - a bit like you’re advised to never admit blame if you have a traffic accident, they’re all trying to reframe their past position or deny it.

I’d have a tiny but of respect for anyone who put heir hands up and apologised, admitted they had got it monumentally fucking wrong, that they weren’t qualified to understand the research and studies they’ve relied on, that they were lazy and gullible and relied upon Stonewall and Mermaids, and that they want to be part of the solution… but they won’t.

Because as more people like Richie Herron and Sinead come out into the open, the more parents confirm their experience of CAHMS etc was exactly as the Cass Report said it was and that their child is irrevocably damaged, the harder it will be for them to look themselves in the mirror.

I kind of hope they all rot in hell, if I’m honest. It’s been a lonely 6 years. I suspect those of us in the trenches have a fair few more to go, even if our kids recover eventually. They can’t give us back those years or give my child her innocence and her teenage years back. I will never forgive them.