Please could you invite Hilary Cass?

[kiterunning]

There are so many questions about the follow-up to her report.
It would be great to have a chance to clarify proposed treatment/therapy for children and also to thank her!

This would be great, I do hope Dr Cass is willing and MN can make it happen.

That would be great. She was very measured on Woman's Hour

I'd be very interested in this.

And in terms of it being Mumsnet and how suitable that is?

Mumsnet is where the biggest group of stakeholders over children's health all gather together.

There isn't a more appropriate place.

One of the world's most famous paediatricians talks to the world's largest gathering of parents?

Yes please!

I would be really interested to hear Dr Cass explaining how the GI clinics will work for young people

As she is someone who clearly accepts the scientific validity of gender identity, that transgender people need the best healthcare in the nhs and that puberty blockers are potentially a valid treatment for dysphoria, it would interesting to read an AMA, to contrast with more extreme views here.

Yes, MN please do invite Dame Hilary Cass and I agree with UtopiaPlanitia that this could be the best format:

Is it feasible to do a livestream video event with Justine (or other host) posing questions from Mumsnetters? I think that would be a better format than the usual guest threads where fewer questions get answered because reading and typing responses takes longer than speaking.

Yes it was excellent when Helen Joyce was on.

Having read her report, I have the utmost respect for Dame Cass and would absolutely welcome such an opportunity.

I agree with most of what you say here.

Where I would differ is the use of the phrase "extreme views". People either believe everyone has a gender identity (I agree Cass seems to believe this) or they don't. I don't believe it. I do accept that to believers, the existence of a gender identity feels "scientific"... even though there is never any scientific proof available.

By virtue of my lack of belief, I can't imagine any scenario where it would be ethically sound to treat a developing child - where their distress could be autism/puberty-related, internalised homophobia or disassociation from their body after sexual assault, for example - with a physical intervention. The feeling of mismatch between the body and mind is most likely best addressed with therapeutic care for any child who experiences this distress. Particularly as it is readily acknowledged that puberty blockers have an unknown impact on the developing teenage brain.

I wouldn't call my view extreme though. However, as you say, it'll be good to hear the viewpoint of a believer who has a paediatric background on how the evidence-based approach would work when people from MN ask questions about this kind of thing.

'Scientific' is doing some heavy lifting here. I don't think GC women believe that no one firmly and honestly holds a gender identity. I certainly think that some people honestly believe they are meant to be the opposite sex.

Where that comes from and what it means for everyone else is the crux. I have worked with people who firmly, honestly believe the CIA are after them, or that they are reincarnated. Or that wine and water turn into blood and flesh. Or that there are ghosts. Or that they are overweight at 6 stone. And there are very good brain structure and chemistry reasons they do believe those things. Or cultural and religious reasons. Or biological reasons. All of which is 'scientific' and valid. And insofar as it's harmless (CIA and weight aren't and ghosts might be) and personal (religion), great.

But 'scientific' and 'true' are not synonyms. Just because someone believes their life is more meaningful and happy living as their idea of what the opposite sex is, doesn't mean everyone else has to live their life as if that's true too. Basically, as in the case of wine and water, belief = good. Spanish Inquisition and conquistadors =/= good.

Sometimes it's therapeutic and kind to work with their reality (like with Alzheimer's patients) but sometimes it isn't (using off-label drugs and experimental surgery on children).

I don't think many posters here dispute that trans people feel they have a gender identity. And as identity is personal, if they say they have one, they have one.

What many of us disagree with is the idea that everyone has one, and that this is a valid basis on which to organise society.

Dr Cass wasn't commissioned to weigh in on philosophical arguments like that; only to look at the evidence regarding care for children who identify as transgender.

The issue is that gender identity isn’t a belief in the sense that religion is a belief - it’s in the same category as sexuality and has genetic and environmental components. It’s the gender critical belief that there is no such thing in the face of evidence which is the pseudo religious belief.

DadJoke · Today 09:24

The issue is that gender identity isn’t a belief in the sense that religion is a belief

Yes, it absolutely is a religious / philosophical belief.

- it’s in the same category as sexuality and has genetic and environmental components.

There's bound to be some medico-scientific, probably psychological causes for it, but that's not the same as it being empirically provable.

It’s the gender critical belief that there is no such thing in the face of evidence which is the pseudo religious belief.

That's a complete turning on its head of the facts. In humans and all mammals, there are two distinct sexes, which is scientifically irrefutable. It's nothing at all like pseudo religious belief, it's the exact opposite, backed up by hard science. "Belief" is the realm of the gender identitarians, not the rational sex realists.

Ridiculous. Of course it is a belief system.

As a Christian who also understands and accepts evolution exists I know the difference between a religion and scientific fact. I also respect not everyone is a Christian and may have different beliefs or no belief.

It’s the same, sex is scientific gender is a social construct.

A social belief requires the transmission of a belief. The expression of gender, sexuality and gender roles are societal but the evidence suggests that unlike, say, religion, sexuality and gender identity have genetic and early environmental components. So being gay or transgender is not “transmissible.” Cass does not treat it as a belief, nor do scientific bodies. Gender critical peoples’ deeply held belief that the science on this issue is false is also legally protected, as long as it can’t be changed by evidence.

I can't believe (tee hee!) I'm posting this. I know if I get anything at all it'll be the same tired, easily debunked links but...let's see the evidence then!

Claiming that there's something in your brain that dictates your sex is obviously a belief. Your sex is dictated by your reproductive pathway. You can't have both definitions.

There might be something in your brain that says you don't like it, of course.

Oooh I’d love to see her on here please, MNHQ.

Claiming that there is something is your brain which dictates your sexuality is the same kind of "belief."

I understand you think it's implausible that we have mental apparatus, determined in part by genes and early environment which affects our relationship to our usual sex group? You are of course entitled to that belief, but it's not what the evidence says. Children have a strong sense of being "like" others of their gender which can't just be explained by social pressure or their genitals. That's what gender identity is - how it manifests is culturally determined.

It seems an odd hill to die on - it doesn't stop you being gender critical to acknowledge what the evidence says. Any, it's clear Cass does not think it's a pseudo-religious belief.

Claiming that there is something is your brain which dictates your sexuality is the same kind of "belief."

Ah, I see that you've deployed some of your strawman phalanx.

She didn't say that, as you know.

I understand you think it's implausible that we have mental apparatus, determined in part by genes and early environment which affects our relationship to our usual sex group?

Who knows? But affecting your relationship with your sex group doesn't change your sex group.

As I said. You're the sex you are, you can't change that. You can have all the theories in the world about why you might not like it.

But you'll never, ever be able to claim that you're the opposite sex, nor that you know how the opposite sex live.

You don't have the equipment.

1. Not everyone believes we all have a gender identity. It's OK that you do and it's ok that I don't. Neither of us needs to persuade the other to shift our position
2. sexuality/sexual orientation isn't a "belief", it's a recognition of sexual attraction by sex category: from puberty, we're all innately same-sex, opposite-sex or both-sex attracted (unless something has "malfunctioned" e.g. medication side effects)
3. for completeness, (biological) sex isn't a "belief" either. It's a biological, physically observable reality. Within the binary of male and female, there are male-specific and female-specific physical variations, including DSDs

it's clear Cass does not think it's a pseudo-religious belief.

It certainly seems that way, agreed. That's why I said it was good that someone who believes that we all have a gender identity (Cass) is advocating for evidence-based care. It sounds like you are too. This is great news!

Unfortunately this is a somewhat of a derail from the thread. I've added a link below where it might be a better place to discuss gender identity as "belief vs fact". Although I can't imagine many believers would want to do so, any more than a Christian would want to debate about god with atheists.... as it would just be a stalemate of believers saying "we know gender identity is real because of a, b, c" and others saying "no, that can be explained by x,y,z" (just as a "god is real" debate would).

https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/4717860-gender-theory-seems-completely-illogical-or-is-it-me

@BonfireLady thank you for that response - I would love to hear from Cass. However, I have sworn off posting on the FWR forum, and I'll keep my word.

@BonfireLady One clarification:

"Although I can't imagine many believers would want to do so, any more than a Christian would want to debate about god with atheists.... as it would just be a stalemate of believers saying "we know gender identity is real because of a, b, c" and others saying "no, that can be explained by x,y,z" (just as a "god is real" debate would)."

We disagree with who the atheists are, here. "We think that gender identity is real, because there is scientific evidence for it based on well conducted studies" vs " We don't think it can be real because it conflicts with our deeply held protected beliefs, therefore the studies are wrong."

Other than that, we are in agreement.

We have some great questions for Cass:

Does she believe in geneder identity?
If so, what does she believe it is, and what is the evidence for this?
Does she think psychologists who do not belive in gender identity, who may be GC can /should be abe to support children with distress at their perceived gender incongruenece?

Then lots of questions about the study. the new clinins and young adults.

There are many things to ask which remain unlcear from the review or her subsequent responses.

Please invite her MNHQ I thin it could be a very rich discussion.