My work insisting I refer to a 9 year old as they/them

Wow. Sounds like @TransParentlyAnnoyed really does live in fantasy land.

I’ve never got my head around folk that make stuff up. Why do it? Surely it’s better to be hated for who you are than loved for who you’re not? And making up crap just to win an argument is self defeating when the “facts” are so easily unpicked.

good work @CassOle

Thank you. The credit really should go to MrPrettyDamnCosmic, though. 🙂

Am now half expecting @TransParentlyAnnoyed to pop up and say “oh, I’ve just have a feeling that I’ve had XYZ child so they do exist” even those they don’t exist then when challenged we’ll get the stock response of being “fantasist-phobic” and how we’ll never know and you only know if you know. But if you know it’s real and everyone else must play along 🤨

Thank you for tagging me and apologies for the delayed response. I had bookmarked your post to come back to it and read the article, then got distracted and forgot 🤦‍♀️

Thankfully I had a vague memory of having done so came back to it just now.

That section about the 18 year olds who come across as 13-14 year olds... I just want to weep 😢

The lack of follow-up.. the fact that this clinic is bankrolling the whole trust... the lack of clinical curiosity..

All of it is shocking but the (likely) permanent brain damage being inflicted on all of these children, who then go on to have more medical interventions once they turn 18, is beyond cruel. I'm glad that PBs were finally stopped as an available treatment but we're about to let 226 children be experimented upon again, with no follow-up beyond 2 years. Then what? Everyone who wants them can have them again?

Cass' 2 year experiment should have been booted out at the ethics stage. But presumably these services are too valuable to each of the trusts that have them. I wonder if any members of the ethics teams that approved it simply dropped out because they didn't want to be the person who pulled the plug on the 💰 but nor could they pass it as ethical.

Nine of its 12 members attended the first meeting, in September 2025 (seven are needed for it to be quorate). A subcommittee of five constituted the second. When approval was granted at the third meeting on 6 November, just three members were present. Only one person went to all three meetings.

https://www.newstatesman.com/politics/health/2026/02/inside-the-decision-to-pause-the-puberty-blocker-trial