Puberty Blockers Question at PMQs

We see you BBC but the mood is changing and you can't ignore that forever.

Not sure why Whittome is so invested in this...

She identifies as "queer" and espouses all the very left-wing tribal causes.

It seems clear, as with Lisa Nandy's comment about letting sporting bodies make decisions about trans participation in sport, that the government wants to position itself as entirely neutral on the issue, and that the best way to do this is to delegate, or to appear to delegate, responsibility to others. I don't know how long it's going to be able to sustain this.

if that really is their plan, the Isla

Bryson-seque nature of trans ideology is not going let them hold onto that for very long

Although Starmer has been driving us all insane for the past four years with his inability to take a stand on this issue, it seems fairly obvious that he has enough sense to see that ignoring or criticising a substantial review by a leading paediatrician would make the government look foolish. Plus, of course, it gives the government cover: "We are following the science," not "We are taking a political position."

It seems clear, as with Lisa Nandy's comment about letting sporting bodies make decisions about trans participation in sport, that the government wants to position itself as entirely neutral on the issue, and that the best way to do this is to delegate, or to appear to delegate, responsibility to others. I don't know how long it's going to be able to sustain this.

The BBC don't seem to have picked this question up on their live website thread nor in the summary, ffs

The entire exchange was interesting. Whittome’s question did not appear to be warmly met, and no one booed Starmer’s excellent response. Not sure why Whittome is so invested in this but at least she stopped short of employing the suicide argument (brilliantly rebutted by Louis Appleby).

Once you're fully informed, as Streeting now appears to be, meetings can look very hollow, very quickly. Once you can no longer rely on emotional blackmailing, there's fuck all else.

This. Just ignore the tantrums.

Stand strong Starmer and Streeting!

The more meetings that are held, the better, in my opinion.

Once you're fully informed, as Streeting now appears to be, meetings can look very hollow, very quickly. Once you can no longer rely on emotional blackmailing, there's fuck all else.

Yep. Thank god

I agree. The marketing machine is still firing on all cylinders.

And because so many people have still drunk the Kool-Aid, or just don't know, I'd like to see the painstaking taking of each point and refuting it unequivocally.

And when people come back with bogus responses, just doing the same thing.

Basically, I want the government to be Mumsnet 😂

I really hope this is a first step of progress. This whole trans trend is, to my relief, going bust.

Thanks OP

I have written to my labour MP to ask them to pass my thanks and praise on to Mr Starmer for this sensible response. I know that plenty of TRAs will be writing in to decry the awfulness of sticking to the science, so I feel it's important that they get a balance of positive messages saying "well done"

The MP for Nottingham, where 40% of children under 16 live in families with a low income, where people have a lower life expectancy the rest of the country, where more than half the population live in the most deprived areas nationally, where infant mortality is higher than average…

this is what she considered to be the most pressing concern for the first Labour PMQs of the new government?

They can see the lawsuits coming down the line and they don't want to be implicated in the scandal of what has been done to children.

Hopefully it means they can see the writing on the wall, despite the likes of Whittome etc.

The thought of children being injected with irreversible drugs to take away their ability to reproduce, have full relationships in adulthood is terrifying. It's like a dystopian nightmare. Its happening in the States, 10 year old.
It's horrible
I fear for my grandchildren safety

And yes, I know, that is exactly what the cass report was for. But, predictably, there are still too many people dissing it.

None of them really seem to understand it, they've just bought into packaged TRA talking points, many of which have already been refuted, like "Cass required too high a standard of evidence that wouldn't be possible for this".

If he can stick to this line, that's great. Just grey rock the activists. I hope he and Streeting don't cave to the pressure, which I'm sure will be immense.

It does look as if Starmer and Streeting have decided they don't want to go down in history as the PM and Health Secretary who ignored the Cass Review.

That's sort of the view I've been coming to. Which makes me think, yet again, that for all of the chaos of the Tory government, the Cass Review was an amazing parting gift.

I wonder if anyone in government will be going backwards and forwards with these people.

Wes: Other than your opinion, what evidence do you have that PBs are beneficial?

Oh, that report okay.

Next day: here is an analysis of that report, and as you can see, it doesn't stand up to scrutiny.

Next?

I'm sure it won't work like that. But, it would be annoying if it's because there's no time. Given how much fucking time has been wasted already.

A painstaking ticking off all the rebutted points would, in my opinion, put this stuff to bed a lot quicker.

And yes, I know, that is exactly what the cass report was for. But, predictably, there are still too many people dissing it.

Such a good response. Clear on position but open to discussing things, brilliant.

I've not watched yet but good for him.

It does look as if Starmer and Streeting have decided they don't want to go down in history as the PM and Health Secretary who ignored the Cass Review.