Anyone know why the thread about the death of the young transman has been deleted

And can I add, that Griffin's situation is only because Griffin was female.

Hiding that Griffin was female, using language that is inaccurate and misleading (taking into consideration that we know that many people in the UK are still confused what sex a 'transman' is) leads to confusion.

And being a feminist board, it is also a topic that is very important as it directly impacts female people.

Plus, it is Mumsnet. And many of us are mothers of children who are daily impacted by the issues discussed on this particular board.

It is remarkable to see accusations about the lack of sincerity of how important posters on this board think this case and all the other children and young people who are accessing experimental treatment are. A treatment that has been promoted under the umbrella of Gender Affirming Care that seems to not be centring the holistic needs of the patients that these clinicians are treating.

Precisely.

Isn't it? That's how I feel about posters who say they are "so concerned" about a young person who is now deceased - so concerned that they discuss them using the wrong pronoun, visit Kiwifarms and sift through old posts and images of theirs (including surgery), etc.

This is a complete non sequitur, but nice try.

Using preferred pronouns is a foundational part of the practice of treating a mental health problem in a way that is very profitable for pharma and surgeons and some psychs and medics, and devastatingly dangerous for the sufferers.

Just as treatment for anorexia nervosa doesn't start with therapists saying 'gosh I'll defer to your mental health problem and pretend you're fat', treatment for people with gender distress shouldn't start with 'gosh I'll defer to your mental health problem in the way I use language'.

Using Griffin’s preferred pronouns contributed to Griffin’s terrible health issues.

Looking for information on kiwi farms is driven by this having been suppressed everywhere else.

Young people are being misled and the wider world seems to be conspiring in that. It’s appalling.

That’s what is being discussed, though you are trying hard to dismiss it as far right bigotry.

Isn't it? That's how I feel about posters who say they are "so concerned" about a young person who is now deceased - so concerned that they discuss them using the wrong pronoun, visit Kiwifarms and sift through old posts and images of theirs (including surgery), etc. So, so solicitous! No, you're fuelled by these things.

@OldCrone

So you agree that the discussions are intelligent, even though most of us (according to you) aren't serious or well-informed?

Read again - I wrote that most posters are serious.

It's rather like poking a dead animal and seeing hundreds of flies buzz off the carcass.

That comment is disturbing on so many fronts.

Thanks to @WarriorN for the succinct 07:17 post that perfectly sums up the concerns of many women on this thread.

A psychologist on Twitter. Psychgirl1211 .

Who is Dr P?

I think that this imagery on a thread about a person who died in tragic circumstances repulsive.

You can believe all you want that this is more academic than the rest of Mumsnet, and most posters here are serious and well-informed, but that's not what I've gleaned over a few good years reading FWR.

Most threads here discuss serious topics. Some less so, but they're obviously less serious (like the current 'just for fun' thread). What makes you think most posters aren't serious? Some are better informed than others, obviously, just like in real life. We're not all experts in everything. But in general it's expected that any claims are backed up with evidence.

In general, conversations are more intelligent and thought-provoking, and that's what has kept me coming back.

So you agree that the discussions are intelligent, even though most of us (according to you) aren't serious or well-informed?

However, the level of vitriol displayed towards others that don't toe the party line does make me question that.

Vitriol, if in the form of abuse, is not tolerated on MN, so you should report this. What do you mean by 'toe the party line'? Many different opinions are discussed here. We don't all agree on everything.

I just read what you posted from Dr P. I think it is a good reminder of what happens when comorbidities are ignored to any degree or at the very least not treated first / with the same focus as gender dysphoria.

And as you say, the vast quantity of evidence that people are reading / watching is self published from Griffin. It would have been of huge concern even if it was just the first round of complications. The continued complications though, that is devastating stuff.

Caliga, this is a huge non argument.

All the sources were from Griffins's social media.

You've used this as an opportunity to scold women who are extremely concerned about this situation, who may have young girls of their own wanting transition and you've turned it into a theoretical political football game.

You're also making it all about you.

@Helleofabore

oh dear. I questioned your sources? And this has upset you? All because you made a clearly biased statement about the behaviour of far right people?

And yet, you assured us you were had been using MN for a long time….

Why would I be upset? 🙄 I was amused yesterday actually at the deluge of posts I received after a few posts. It's rather like poking a dead animal and seeing hundreds of flies buzz off the carcass. (BTW: you've already said 'clearly biased'. I got it the first time.)

The need to 'back up claims with something' isn't a sign of an academic environment, it's a sign of living in a world bounded by material reality.

The need to know facts underlines everything we do - here we're discussing the devastating effects of trying to force a human body to conform to an irrational fantasy, but our lives are bounded by - weather, the force of gravity, light and darkness, the need for food and water, the need for shelter, the need to trust each other in business and trade - all these, ultimately, need to be backed up with some THING - and we spend our lives examining and juggling those realities. Ultimately, knowledge, not emotion, is power.

Hearts and minds are lovely and important, but exist in that same material universe as our bodies, and any of us who ignore that are putting ourselves in danger.

You can believe all you want that this is more academic than the rest of Mumsnet, and most posters here are serious and well-informed, but that's not what I've gleaned over a few good years reading FWR.

In general, conversations are more intelligent and thought-provoking, and that's what has kept me coming back. However, the level of vitriol displayed towards others that don't toe the party line does make me question that.

I'm absolutely for safeguarding of children and protection of the rights of women. Did something give you the impression I was not?

oh dear. I questioned your sources? And this has upset you? All because you made a clearly biased statement about the behaviour of far right people?

And yet, you assured us you were had been using MN for a long time….

Dr P is a clinical psychologist, certainly the type of source who should be commenting on such cases.

She's written at length about the condition on Twitter and also has been writing about what she has observed within this case.

Her primary concern is welfare for the individual. This is not hatred or bigotry

You wondered about my sources; considered them to be inferior, although you don't know what they are; told me I'm not backing up my claims with anything although I was unaware this was an academic environment rather than Mumsnet.

If you spend a bit more time on FWR, you'll see that we do take quite an "academic" attitude to what is posted here. It's a serious forum, discussing serious issues, and we like to see evidence of claims made, so citing sources is important.

If you prefer to make wild unevidenced claims and don't wish to name your sources, you might find other parts of the site like AIBU or Chat more to your liking.

Of course my original statement is biased as it comes from my heart and mind. Everything you write is also quite biased, although you might not recognise it.

The bias on this part of Mumsnet tends to be towards safeguarding, protection of women's rights and concern for children caught up in trans ideology. If your bias is towards a cowboy free-for-all in cosmetic surgery (including for minors) and/or men's rights and/or the destruction of women's rights and/or encouraging troubled children to believe they were born in the wrong body, you won't get a good reception here.

@Helleofabore

And yet, on this thread, I simply pointed out that your initial statement :

"It encompasses all the hate and bilge that can't be expressed on the usual sites. This hostility and ideology stems most commonly from the far right."

was heavily biased and overly simplistic. I also pointed out after you accused me of 'calling you out' to which I again pointed to your initial post and reminded you that you were the one calling out posters.

This is not 'patronising', it is criticism. The rest is just you trying pivot and swivel and then claiming to be a victim of being 'talked down to' and 'patronised'.

You have done fuck all to support this initial claim of yours or any other that I have seen, despite your educational claims. Instead, you seem to only be interested in derailing the thread and distracting people from discussing the horror of Griffin's situation and what can be learned from it and what changes need to happen.

You did more than that. You wondered about my sources; considered them to be inferior, although you don't know what they are; told me I'm not backing up my claims with anything although I was unaware this was an academic environment rather than Mumsnet. Of course my original statement is biased as it comes from my heart and mind. Everything you write is also quite biased, although you might not recognise it. That statement also was about Griffin.

Unfortunately not, I'm not a member (I need to resist the temptation to comment!) - but I think anyone can register to use it.

Poor kid. Never had a chance.

I doubt a crowdfunder is needed. If a case has any chance at all there'll be a queue of lawyers round the block.

I wonder if Griffin’s family are able to take legal action against the various doctors involved?

I’d be happy to chuck some in for a crowdfunder but I don’t know how the US system works - can the medical insurer sue the service provider (or claim against the service provider’s professional insurance?) on behalf of the family?