Wes Streeting addresses puberty blockers decision -excellent response

Lisa Nandy is backing Streeting and Cass
twitter.com/okaybiology/status/1812792396955967737?s=46&t=g7UjjEa2S2y82o-tbjyL_g

All these people telling Streeting he's killing children, utter hyperbole and they should be ashamed of themselves. Outrageous that the Labour MPs upthread who seem to be supporting these twats don't seem to have condemned this type of abuse. I'd like to be wrong and they have but I've missed it.

I would like to take this opportunity to condemn the people who have called Stella Creasy a child killer because of her stance on abortion. It's not nice, is it?

Found this article on apparent co-ordination in the abuse of candidates in the recent elections

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cn05edkr97vo.amp

I hope there is an investigation, it will be interesting to see what it turns up.

Almost like...if you're non-conforming to stereotypes, it's normal and doesn't need interfering with..??

But then where does the grift go

If it's a naturally occurring part of human diversity then it doesn't need treatment with puberty blockers and hormones, does it?

This. A million times.

And although Zac Goldsmith thinks it's appalling, and has correctly identified all the terrible effects this is having on children, people like him are still lagging behind understanding why these children were necessary in the first place.

Retconning an adult fetish. An adult male fetish.

It's a real head scratcher isn't it?

"Naturally occurring". Hence throwing toys out the pram now they can't experiment on kids. Make it make sense.

https://x.com/nancymmk/status/1812722299356815819?s=46&t=WHoOZ3Kv5G6-FyQuvE0LQ

"The "risk" that stalks the debate about PB, from Cass to this thread is the "risk" a trans child will grow up to be a trans adult. If you believe (as I do) that being trans is a naturally occurring part of human diversity, the picture looks very different."

If we lose the idea of the "trans" child who is born in the wrong body and liable to kill themselves without recourse to hormones, then it will be clear that what we are left with is a bunch of middle-aged blokes who derive a sexual kick from wearing a dress and flaunting their bits in women's changing rooms.

Which, of course, is why 'trans children' were invented in the first place.

Also interesting to see Zac Goldsmith retweet JK Rowling with a very forceful comment:

https://x.com/ZacGoldsmith/status/1812502371974463736

For those not on X, the comment is: "There’s no obvious upside. But the downside includes irreversible & lifelong harm to children’s bodies, sterility, withered genitals, cancer, osteoporosis, unknown but likely grave effects on brain development. For the zealots none of this matters because ideology is more important than actual children. They are appalling."

It is quite gratifying to see how unhinged some of the responses to Streeting are. You'd think these people would be smart enough to at least try to appear sane when responding to the secretary of state for health, but apparently not. Streeting is now getting a very very small taste of what Rosie Duffield has been through over the past few years.

I notice a lot of them accuse Streeting of taking notice of Rowling rather than medical experts - apparently completely oblivious to the Cass review, conducted by a respected paediatrician with a team of researchers over a period of several years. Are they really this stupid or deliberately distorting the facts?

I am feeling cautiously positive about Streeting's stance. Once we stop pushing medical interventions on vulnerable gender-dysphoric children and young adults, the whole trend for those children to "identify" as the opposite sex will come to an end, I think. They will simply grow out of it as they hit puberty, or at worst they will dye their hair blue and call themselves "non-binary".

If we lose the idea of the "trans" child who is born in the wrong body and liable to kill themselves without recourse to hormones, then it will be clear that what we are left with is a bunch of middle-aged blokes who derive a sexual kick from wearing a dress and flaunting their bits in women's changing rooms. That will, one hopes, be difficult for people like Annaliese Dodds and her colleagues to defend.

When patients turn up at CAHMS with suicidal ideation, the treating professionals support the young people with their overwhelming. They help them process their feelings and understand the source of distress. For example, if the young person is struggling with bullying or abuse, they make referrals and expect others to address those issues. They carry on with the psychological treatment.

If any YP experience suicide ideation and understand this as arising from not being prescribed puberty blockers, mental health professionals can and should treat the YP for this and help them process and cope with the feelings arising. THIS is the message that JM and co should be giving- e.g. 'we know that many families will be worried about this. We don't want you to worry. There are plenty of us fighting your corner and we think are taking action to get this sorted. In the meantime, if you are feeling distressed, mental health practitioners can help you feel better'.

It is the usual suspects though...

Either Magic.

Or they didn't have a bunch of middle aged males and their clueless friends literally cheerleading for them to kill themselves.

I think the Angela Rayner originally appeared in Telegraph. When I went to look for it though, I saw it had been picked up everywhere. Might have been pushed off the front pages by Trump

www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2024/07/13/labours-first-week-allies-fear-angela-rayner-frozen-out/

People other than us must be increasingly puzzled by the difference between how these issues are covered by the BBC and most other media.

There was an article in the Mail today talking about how noises were coming out of Angela Rayner's camp that she was being effectively side lined in the Deputy PM role

I always thought Deputy PM was a bit of a vanity role anyway, that could be deployed either to give status or to sideline, or a bit of both, as in the appointment of John Prescott in Blair’s government.

Absolutely.

Jolyn et al (including a number of MPs it seems) are creating a false belief.

BBC with their finger on the pulse

https://x.com/journalismseen/status/1812730702665838997?s=46&t=WHoOZ_3Kv5G6-FyQuvE0LQ

How did all those trans adults and activists make it to adulthood without puberty blockers?

Indeed. And you'd think that if TRAs are going to leverage children's mental health to the extent of accusing a government minister of killing them, they would be getting asked these unanswerable questions.

All those suicide threats in the responses! It’s like a mass incantation. So much disordered thinking.

I am glad WS is doing this, I didn’t believe he was genuine when he seemed to have turned around before.

He can't answer the question because of how it's now agreed the phrase is deeply offensive and actively harmful.

So he's avoidant. Avoidant lawyers are telling you something if you pay attention.

Just to follow up on this point.

There was an article in the Mail today talking about how noises were coming out of Angela Rayner's camp that she was being effectively side lined in the Deputy PM role

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-13633267/Angela-Rayner-allies-fear-frozen-fortnight-Labour-government.html

Now Rayner is definitely regarded as a darling of the left of the party.

Of course I suspect the Mail is trying to build up the concept of a split / civil war within the Labour Party for it's own agenda, but I do think it's worth keeping a close eye on what's happening because there is a chance there's also some substance to this because of the noise we are hearing on womens rights and puberty blockers.

As I said immediately after the election, the manner of Labour's victory gives little room for them to move in terms of winning enough votes for a second term because of how sitting governments tend to get punished at the ballot box. They have a few options - polarise and move more left, or work on trust and credibility and competence to win more of the centre ground.

Going left is riskier with Reform and aligning yourself with people who swear that a bepenised individual can be a woman.

I would dearly love to see someone ask Jolyon why all these children are gender distressed.

What is the reason? I'd like to see him actually say they're 'born in the wrong body'.

And if he daren't lest he looks like an unhinged loon, then let's hear some bloody reasons.

The thing is, there's sufficient evidence to suggest a study will show harm in the long run from what we know in other areas, so putting new kids on the trial is next to impossible within ethical practice. The trouble is that the concept of ethical practice is itself fragile. The whole thing is fairly bonkers.