Cass review: how has report affected care for transgender young people? - The Guardian 2/7/25

I have often wondered whether the neurodiverse girls coming through early secondary schools now, will drop the gender obsession, now the El Dorado of puberty blockers has gone, and social transitioning in schools is under heavy fire. Surely they can no longer get obsessed with transitioning as the solution to their problems if the transitioning pipeline doesn’t exist anymore.

I desperately hope these girls go back to identifying as goths or some other harmless subculture, temporarily shocking their grandparents at family BBQs with stupid haircuts and piercings.

@spannasaurus thanks for the link but there appears to be a typo in the URL that you posted (odd extra at end) here is correct version www.buttonslives.news/p/the-global-response-to-the-cass-review

The two are in no way comparable. It is foolish to do so. But please continue to not provide even a modicum of evidence to support your posts. It is great for readers to see such arguments being used.

I see similar assertions from gender clinicians when compared to lobotomists. Walter Freeman went to his grave convinced lobotomy was a good idea. There will be gender clinicians who will equally never back down on their belief that sterilising children is the best way to treat them.

They will also fight tooth and nail against anything that counters that, like the Cass Review.

Consider if you’re a gender clinician who sterilises children. To follow the Cass Review from now on would mean a tacit admission you’ve sterilised children in the recent past for no good reason. You’re admitting your own liability in any legal case that child might bring. Of course you’re going to show “low mood” for going that way.

The whole idea of the umbrella of “trans” is to seek to shade the AGP’s and other, fetishists and the minor interested people using that of the lesbian and gay community.

I find the whole use of umbrellas to try and stop objectors as the most profound and insidious expression of it.

@GallantKumquat
This has been mentioned before, but I do seriously wonder if 'gender dysphoria' is in fact 100% social contagion.

I think it can be but it also seems like a common trauma response for people who were repeatedly sexually abused as toddlers or young children.

Oh do Fuck off dear

I’m a left wing remainer

and I can tell the difference between a man and a woman because you know reality

TRA is a men’s rights movement - always has been always will be

But every month more countries are realising sterilising and mutilising children is a bad idea and stopping it, Some countries are also dropping Self ID as they’ve realised what a shit show that is. It’s almost as if people are “educating themselves” as we were told to do.

What I don't understand is how anybody that thinks a paper produced by gender studies "professors" and then peer reviewed by gender studies "professors" doesn't have an inherent bias as they are affirming their own jobs.

I see similar assertions from those who cling to brexit being a good idea that all those other countries are all marching out of step except us.

And just what are those "news reports"? Because as per usual, just like with Thalidomide and lobotomies, we are right, and you, as always per usual, are wrong. Which is why you are losing the war.

Which bad old days are you talking about? The bad old days when gay men and rapists were forcibly given the drugs now known as puberty blockers?

Or the ‘bad old days’ when children were not sterilised while they were too young to understand what they are losing?

Sure dude. Sure you were. But the thing is, if you’re going to lie about something as basic as your sex… why would anyone believe anything you tell them. Once a liar, always a liar.

To echo what some others have said: give it time.

The bad old days of not sterilising confused kids. Gosh.

yeah already have news reports of things returning to the bad old days. As per usual, we were right.

That's an excellent post @NotBadConsidering

Tiring to have to repeatedly educate the ideologically captured but essential if children are to be safeguarded from this dangerous nonsense.

ooh.. Do tell. Which countries have declared that the Cass report has drawn poor conclusions?

One can tell if medical reviews are high quality: their evidence and recommendations are accepted and acted upon (copied) widely outside the jurisdiction in which they were originally proposed.

There is a recognised, established hierarchy of assessment of the quality of medical evidence, and “being adopted by other countries” isn’t one of them. The systematic reviews that underpin Cass are of the highest quality evidence.

There are multiple examples of poor quality medical reviews being adopted geographically widely, but of course the most notable is WPATH’s SOC8. The idea that SOC8 is good because it was adopted widely is laughable. Other examples in medicine exist. Equally, countries have produced high quality medical reviews on different subjects that don’t necessarily get seen elsewhere. I don’t know where you get the idea that widespread adoption is an endorsement of quality.

That aside, there is actually strong appetite for adoption of the recommendations of Cass, because many recognise its quality and also to avoid reinventing the wheel. Many people in many jurisdictions have a strong mood for this, not a slight mood.

What there is though is a slight mood to adopt it from gender clinicians. Take for example, in Australia where the Cass Review was introduced as evidence in the case by a mother wanted to transition her child, and the judge noted, in respect to the testimony of Michelle Telfer, that the Cass review “was contrary to her entire life’s work”. The Cass Review was introduced by the mother’s team, and the gender clinicians argued the Cass Review was flawed, but the judge read it and considered it an important piece of evidence relevant to the medical transition of children.

https://www.austlii.edu.au/cgi-bin/viewdoc/au/cases/cth/FedCFamC1F/2025/211.html

So the Cass Review has been relevant in other jurisdictions already. It helped stop a child from being medically transitioned in Australia.

Finally, the final Cass Review was published in April 2024. It’s only been just over a year and that year has been spent wearily arguing against spurious and false “takedowns” of it, which are obviously nonsense. The first country to ban lobotomy was the Soviet Union in 1950. It took more than 20 years for some other countries to follow suit. 15 months is nothing.

Review of global response to the review

https://www.buttonslives.news/p/the-global-response-to-the-cass-review's

The international mood to adopt Dr Cass' ideas is not slight. Growing numbers of European countries are restricting puberty blockers and hormones for minors

If other countries wish to sterilise children and put them on a path of lifetime medication that’s up to them

we can’t legislate for other countries stupidity