MoS does it again

[BettyFloop]

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7244783/Academics-medical-experts-fears-children-number-seeking-sex-change-operations-sky-rockets.html

How is it that the newspaper I least identify with is one of the two stalwart media outlets that continues to be barefaced about this?

Anyway, pleased to read it - can't pick a hole, frankly.

As you say BettyFloop can't pick a hole in this article. It really does highlight the weird stranglehold that transgender ideology has on health professionals that they can't express reservations about dangerous medication of children without being accused of prejudice.

Here in NZ it's a lost cause I am afraid with regards to children and young people. I felt sick when I read the document below, and I don't know of any medical professionals here challenging the dangerous ideology underpinning its recommendations for treatment of confused children.

researchcommons.waikato.ac.nz/bitstream/handle/10289/12160/Guidelines%20for%20Gender%20Affirming%20Health%20low%20res.pdf?sequence=2&isAllowed=y

Another strong piece from Sanchez.

This pandering from health professionals and society needs to stop.
How TRAs have silenced and brainwashed those with a responsibility to protect children and carry out ethical, evidence based practice, is a crime in itself.

The usual responses from the child catchers who profit from the exploitation of children.

Brilliant, what a great idea to put all this evidence and comment into a book.
No one can say they didn’t know all this shit was happening.

Which other mental health condition is tackled by mutilating a healthy body? 'Affirmation' approach? Then why not affirm anorexia?

Research has shown the vast majority of those who take puberty blockers go on to start 'cross-sex hormone therapy' at 16, which involves doses of oestrogen for males and testosterone for females. This strong hormone medication begins the physical process of changing individuals from one sex to another and is likely to lead to a loss in fertility

Well there's a hole you can pick...

Otherwise great article and I'll be interested in the book.

In actual fact, it is unlikely they will ever have babies – with boys facing the minefield of finding a surrogate mother to have a baby using their sperm and the relatively low chances of frozen eggs producing a child, the clinicians say

GIDS promoting surrogacy and telling children they can change sex. and what exactly do they mean by "boys" here??

Girls who want to live as boys will "need a surrogate" if they want a child
Boys who want to live as girls will also "need a surrogate" if they want a child.
Why just "boys" in the article?

Not only that, but puberty blockers given early will prevent harvesting of eggs or sperm, so if cross-sex hormones result in permanent infertility, and virtually all those taking blockers go on to take them, then the chance of having children is reduced to zero.

Excellent article. Yet still the lobby groups go from strength to strength using tax payer's money and getting access to schools to peddle their toxic ideas to children.

It's because they have no liberal woke reputation to defend, so don't give a shit.

Glad to see a piece about a second book from Heather and colleagues.

The first book is here:

www.amazon.co.uk/Transgender-Children-Michele-Heather-Brunskell-Evans/dp/1527509303?tag=mumsnetforu03-21

Can recommend if anyone has not yet read it. A good review of it by a Tavistock clinician here:

www.heather-brunskell-evans.co.uk/body-politics/book-review-transgender-children-and-young-people-born-in-your-own-body/

Another great article by Sanchez Manning. The Mail/MOS has been running lots of pieces on this for some time now. I think it was Sanchez who first covered the Man Fridays over a year ago - it was a big piece too.

A Mermaids spokesman said: 'We have no control over decisions made by staff at the Tavistock clinic and we do not instruct our service users on what help they should seek within the NHS.

Juells, not just that. The Mail is aiming for a wider readership, and has a fairly good understanding of their market. I suspect MN posters may be on average more educated, and more urban than many Mail readers, but that does not mean that the Mail political instincts are less accurate.

On this one, their reporting almost certainly reflects the views of their readership, and I wonder if the response they got from early articles helped encourage the Times to take a similar editorial position. As James Kirkup suggests, few in government actually believe TWAW, and I assume editors feel the same way.

It's the Guardian who has a problem. Their revenue is not readership dependent, instead relying on trust funds and donations, often from outside the UK. They can afford to take a forward stance on societal issues, that does not reflect the thinking of the majority. The hope presumably is that society will catch up. If not they are left looking isolated and preachy.

I hope that Sanchez Manning is considered for a journalistic award. Her articles have been consistently clear and well researched.

The lying Mermaids.
Maybe there should be a meme?

Lying.

Usually they're lying on rocks I suppose

Posted too early.

I find that statement so disingenuous from Mermaids. They state one of their aims as to Improve awareness, understanding and practices of GP’s, CAMHS, Social Services and other professionals.

That suggests Mermaids sets the best practices for GP’s etc. I don’t believe they set best practice and at the same time advise parents what best practice they should expect.

That suggests Mermaids sets the best practices for GP’s etc. I don’t believe they set best practice and at the same time don’t advise parents what best practice they should expect.

Having David Bell, former governor of Tavistock, contribute to that book is huge.

Is the Information Sheet that was given to patients about the trial a new discovery by Michael Biggs? Hadn't read about that before.

And yes, Sanchez Manning's reporting of these issues has been excellent.

The lying Mermaids.
Maybe there should be a meme?
There's a superb one by Sandy Draws Badly, but I suspect it would lead to a deletion.

It was good that the article stressed infertility as a consequence of puberty blockers. Do many people realise this I wonder?

Here's another image instead re some people's concern over child experimentation.

It’s not just infertility it’s all the other stuff that goes with puberty

Experimenting on children in full view

How is it that the newspaper I least identify with is one of the two stalwart media outlets that continues to be barefaced about this?

DH reads everything from the guardian/independent through to the telegraph plus the bbc. I noticed him reading a piece in the mail online yesterday about the warships in the gulf, he commented that their factual reporting - when it's verifiable information not opinion, is generally quite reliable.

I'd guess this is a similar situation.

The question you should ask is not why newspapers such as the mail and times** are reporting these serious factual matters, it's why some of the others aren't.