Is this a safe place to ask a question without being flamed?

No.

The majority of youngsters who have gender distress do not turn out to be trans, it’s often a temporary phase. Going through puberty resolves the gender distress and many of them go on to realise and accept that they are gay.

But if a child is put onto puberty blockers, puberty is not allowed to happen and the resolution doesn’t happen. Most such children go on to cross-sex hormones, and very possibly surgery. And yet many of them would have gone on to lead normal healthy lives if left alone, instead of having life-long medical problems.

Puberty blockers are not fully reversible and have side effects. Cross-sex hormones and surgery are definitely not reversible. So putting any youngster who is suffering gender distress onto puberty blockers is irresponsible and harmful. While it might help the small number of youngsters who persist with a trans identity, it will harm many others.

That is why we urge caution concerning puberty blockers. It has nothing to do with making it easier for us to detect trans people.

If you really want to know about the medical evidence about puberty blockers and the paucity of evidence that they help youngsters with gender distress, you could read the Cass Review.

cass.independent-review.uk/

I will get back to you on this after much further reading. It is late and there are many chores to complete tomorrow! Night.

Apparently we must put boys who play with what sexist adults think are the "wrong toys" for their sex and especially boys who their parents suspect are gay which they can't handle (as the Tavi whistleblowers pointed out), on irreversible puberty blockers which will prevent them going through adolescence and developing adult male features and genitals, and that's "vital health care" because some middle aged adult men are sad that most women like me can see they're clearly male, and some parents would rather have a "trans daughter" than a "gay son". See Suzy Green and her child. She was laughing in a video that the surgeons "didn't have much to work with" when she took him for surgery in Thailand at 16. Well, no, they wouldn't. Because puberty blockers do that. They aren't reversible. They are a one-way medical pathway.

I know who I think is "sick" and it's anyone that supports this vile, abusive nonsense. These are KIDS, propping up adult male's fantasies about themselves. And this idiot who doesn't even know most of what we're talking about here has the nerve to blame me and women like me for seeing it? I despair. No, actually, I'm furious. This nonsense has to stop.

It's absurd, isn't it? Not a serious poster, and certainly not a knowledgeable one.

Quite unbelievable.

So your wish is to deny medical treatment to patients because you cannot identify them in order to exclude them for our spaces.

That's not why people think puberty blockers are a problem

I have absolutely no idea what you are talking about. Nobody is denying anyone "medical treatment". What "medical treatment" are you talking about?

I couldn't care less if you "feel sick". You're being ridiculous and hyperbolic. When presented with uncomfortable facts you don't like. You're talking to grown ups on here.

I'm sorry to tell you that I have heard from a number of males who id as women that they feel their lives would be easier if they had been given puberty blockers in their teens primarily BECAUSE they would "pass" better as women.

That is extremely sick, when you think about it. If you know anything about what putting kids, boys in this case, on puberty blocks does to their bodies, and that it most certainly is not "reversible" or a "pause button". You get one shot at puberty.

You are at stage 3.

Stage 1: Airhead. Accepting what you are told without question. You are determined to do anything you can to support TWAW.
Stage 2: Peaker. Starting to see there's a few issues that need to be addressed as it's clear their a conflict point. You still want to be nice about trans people and don't want to offend.
Stage 3: In the land of nuances. Desperate to prove you are still kind but very aware of being accused differently. The opinions of what others think of tmyyis more significant than it should be.
Stage 4. Deeper Thinker. You start to realise 'be kind' is a sham and there's a lack of counter respect. You are prepared to give it, they want to take without receprecation.
Stage 5. It dawn on you you've been missold a lie. You feel like you have mug tattooed on your forehead.

I would go further but I think that's the deal.

What are you talking about? We're not talking about denying treatment to TiM. We're talking about women not having to submit to men's presence in intimate care.

Why do you care more about these men's desires than the safety, privacy and dignity of women and girls?

If you want to be a men's ally and aid and support them in encroaching on women's rights, safety, privacy and dignity then crack on but at least be honest about it and say that. If you feel society needs to affirm the delusions of these men and welcome them into the spaces where women are most vulnerable then say it.

Yes, exactly what I meant, but stated more clearly!

Essentially then your decision is to support the freedoms and choices of men over the inclusion, equality, rights, privacy, dignity and safety of women.

Which is your decision, but you need to own that you're 'siding' with male supremacism.

> hihelenhi · Today 20:37
> Most "trans women" do not pass ... which is one of the big reasons there's a push to puberty blockers in teens b) being able to correctly identify who are the males and who are the females is a cognitive skill that most people develop when babies - facial pattern recognition

So your wish is to deny medical treatment to patients because you cannot identify them in order to exclude them for our spaces.

Sod this! At this point I lost any support for your cause. I feel sick.
I will side with the people I know in real life. s

> Also he’s a decent human and just wouldn’t want to get undressed in front of women and little girls.

True.

The Women Who Wouldn't Wheesht and Sexed- A History of British Feminism are also very good.

That is just so fucking awful.

Also worth considering in the going on a decade now since this political movement really became loud and public, and women's spaces, resources, rights and equalities, facilities and services were made mixed sex without consulting them or actively against their consent in favour of men's wishes?

Has respect for women as a sex class increased?

Have the rates of male assault and violence against women and girls decreased?

Have things like rape being pretty much decriminalised and increasing numbers of girls sexually assaulted at school become a thing of the past?

It all joins up. When you have two men actively colluding to enable each other to enjoy an undressed, non consenting woman who cannot protest or resist in fear of losing her access to care, and this is normal, then you see how this political movement is a men's rights movement. Quite arguably, a men's sexual rights movement. And it is anything but good for women.

Wonder why so many teenaged girls are desperately trying to identify out of having to grow up to be women?

It is terrifying ditalini and then people act all shocked, wring their hands and proclaim how awful while simultaneously wondering how disabled, vulnerable and elderly people get abused.

User6874356
Good men stay out so bad men stand out.

This is exactly the point.

It's kind if terrifying isn't it? "Oh what you don't know won't hurt you".

I wonder if they apply the same reasoning to the care of blind people or other people whose disabilities might rely on carers being who they say they are? "Oh she's an old demented woman, she can't tell the difference, don't worry about her 'what matters to me' form expressing a preference for female carers".

You would very likely notice a man in the women’s changing room or toilet. I’ve never met a trans woman/ trans id man that I couldn’t tell was male.

you might have a friend who is trans identified who you like and can’t imagine why other women would object to their presence in same sex spaces. I have a very close platonic male friend who I generally wouldn’t mind sharing spaces that I would normally share only with women or intimate partners. But still I wouldn’t expect him to be able to use women’s spaces- he’s a man and other women don’t know him. Also he’s a decent human and just wouldn’t want to get undressed in front of women and little girls. Good men stay out so bad men stand out

who Is pushing you to take a stance on this? I'm curious because I only ever encounter this issue online - never irl, even though I'm a teacher and out and about in the world. My school has recently issued updated guidance in the light of Cass but I still haven't ever taught a trans student.

The good and decent men don't enter female spaces and don't need to be told why. I feel that any man however he presents or identifies, and whatever certificate he has, who does enter female only spaces is not to be trusted. He doesn't care about the privacy, safety and dignity of women.

I agree with UpThePankhurst that the GRA needs to be amended (I would prefer repealed). In my opinion those with GRC's should never be treated as the opposite sex to what they are in law. So no more men going into women's prisons. It should not be a discussion men should be sent to mens prison.

I think wikipedia can help us here.

Just try reading the EqA.

Strange how we were all hateful bigots to you last night and yet today here you are making many of the points we make on this Board. How very strange.

That is appalling.

That is a man actively enabling another man to abuse and control a woman, exploiting their position of power and her vulnerability. For his own enjoyment. Using her body in a state of undress and removed dignity.

It's sexual assault.

PC = Protected Characteristic as per the Equality Act. GR = Gender Reassignment. TQ - Transgender and Queer, as in LGBTQ+.

So you don't know the basics but were happy to call us all hilarious bigots yesterday. Hokay.