Keira Bell in the Sunday Times today

[McDuffy]

Share token for the early birds

'Gender drugs may have cost me chance at motherhood’

www.thetimes.co.uk/article/f229ac48-055c-11eb-910e-49261a8ea333?shareToken=fe5e0891f6755e16093fc1398a45a522

I've recently had to quietly withdraw from a couple of long term friendships with liberal religious women who were really lovely, well meaning sorts, but who cheerlead incessantly for the Mermaids schtick. We've talked about women and girls with experience like Keira, and they point blank refuse to do anything but enthusiastically wave their pompoms about 'protecting trans kids', as though what Keira is trying to do won't do that. The zealotry eventually made me realise my entire opinion of these women was being coloured by seeing them celebrate young heterosexual women claiming to be gay men, and young lesbian women claiming to be het men and cosmetically modifying their body to try and achieve this, and saying anyone who doesn't agree is as silly as some saying you should never dye your hair or wear braces on your teeth. Like there is even the slightest comparison. I decided that I already have plenty of good friends who might not agree with me, but don't actively campaign for these abuses to be promoted as, not only benign, but an active good. I'm happy to lose those that clap along to cosmetic mastectomy and deliberately stunting children's development.

Thank you to Keira and the mother bringing this landmark case
Children and teenagers with gender distress deserve the same high standards of safeguarding, informed consent and access to professional talking therapies as anyone else does. It’s a scandal that these kids are still being turned into the posterchildren for an adult political movement, at such immense and permanent personal cost.

I hope that this case brings many more people to wake up to the reality of what is happening at scale and how individually devastating it can be.

This whole area needs Parliament to bring in statutory regulation. The current situation of individual doctors prescribing these unevidenced invasive physical transition ‘treatments’ under the normal medical legal rules, in the context of a vociferous political lobby and social media environment in which anything less than unquestioning affirmation is read as ‘phobic’, has clearly catastrophically failed many patients.

Also MPs should ensure that as part of reinstating safeguarding and proper informed consent, the invasive physical transitioning of under 25s and of vulnerable adults is stopped. 25 years old is apparently the age when the human brain matures to adulthood, if the body has been allowed to go through the natural puberty process.

Now she's a true example of being stunning and brave. I wish her the best with her case

According to the crowd justice page the hearing will be on 7th 8th October. Wednesday Thursday this week. I hope someone will be live tweeting, if the court allows.

To answer a post above - The criticisms about the lawyer are that he (and the firm that he is a member of I think) do, among other things, litigation which people say is aimed at reducing access to abortion. I understand they have links with an American organisation which litigate on religious freedom and conflicts of rights between religious Christians, and the rights of lbgt people, and the right to access abortion.

I have read that the lawyer also worked on the fair cop jd. They obviously specialise in freedom of speech and medical negligence, but choose cases which progress their religious rights agenda.

I personally think keira and the others have to pick the best lawyer for the job.

The question it raises is whether by undermining a child's right to agree to medical intervention because they id as trans, it might undermine their right to access other medical interventions eg contraception or abortion. I dont think it would. But those who are criticising the case are pointing out that the lawyers may be betting that it will - giving them legal arguments for future cases on abortion.

Mainly I want to see the benefits and risks to the children seeking medical intervention really examined in court, and crucially the evidence base for both of those to make a proper judgement on whether it's truely informed consent. I'm glad they are doing it and they can choose the lawyer they want.

The trans lobby are digging deep to try and conflate issues.

Thank you Manderlay again (great name by the way). I think the person in the comments may not have been the most reliable source. It is also daft because I have a friend who is a lawyer who has defended murderers obviously he is not in favour of murder.

I though it was interesting that the opposing comments were this is bad not because Keira doesn’t have a case but because it is going to lead to another very bad unrelated outcome on the basis of bollocks. The other comment was from a trans academic who said we have being saying this all along but we are very cross with you for saying it. If they had been saying it all along why did none of them help any of the detransitioners?

Do you think they think Keira is going to win and this is their harm reduction strategy?

The question it raises is whether by undermining a child's right to agree to medical intervention because they id as trans, it might undermine their right to access other medical interventions eg contraception or abortion. I dont think it would. But those who are criticising the case are pointing out that the lawyers may be betting that it will - giving them legal arguments for future cases on abortion.

That is a risk. It's all about Gillick competency and what a child is able to consent to in terms of medical procedures. However, anyone but an idiot should be able to see that consenting to contraception or abortion (which will prevent a child having to experience the horrors of pregnancy, childbirth and young motherhood) is very different from consenting to going on a medical pathway that could lead to infertility and long term health damage.

Isn’t the argument there are some things that are so harmful that you can’t consent to them. No one said the we can’t consent to this campaign was wrong. If you don’t know that you will have life long consequences how can you consent.

The case is nothing to do with abortion rights.

The only connection is that the lawyer representing the claimants has also, in completely different cases, been involved in various prolife cases.

Unless anyone wants to make the (possibly libellous) claim that this lawyer is behaving inappropriately with regards to some nefarious aim over abortion access, then I think it's patently obvious that this is just shit-flinging by people who, frankly, couldn't give two hoots about abortion access, they just don't want youngsters protected from hugely damaging medical decisions that they cannot properly consent to.

However, anyone but an idiot should be able to see that consenting to contraception or abortion (which will prevent a child having to experience the horrors of pregnancy, childbirth and young motherhood) is very different from consenting to going on a medical pathway that could lead to infertility and long term health damage.

Yes, the differences are obvious. TRAs will still try to fudge it though, and pretend feminists are supporting access to abortion being reduced, etc. Because right wing religious nutjobs innit?

Isn’t the argument there are some things that are so harmful that you can’t consent to them.

Quite.

My immediate thoughts when yet another 'killed during sex' case comes up with 'she consented!'

She’s such a brave young woman, to speak publicly about what has been done to her. I say been done to her, rather than what she did to herself, because she was too young to make the decision, as time has proven. The comments are wonderful, and I feel her articulate has given a wonderful opportunity for commentators to educate the public in the issues surrounding the risks or ‘transitioning’, not to mention pointing out the ratios between young female bodied people who identify as trans and middle aged male bodied people who identify as trans.

There was a brilliant comment on boys sharing porn and the sexual expectations put on young females, as one of reasons young girls want to escape their sex. I must admit, I’m reading the comments and saying “that’s a Mumsnetter......theres one...there’s another one” ala Hale and Pace. 😁

Personally I would have very little in common politically with that anti-choice lawyer but clearly on this one important issue it’s important that Keira and her case partner get the best lawyer they can for their specific case. He’s their lawyer. They’re not voting for him..

The more left wing lawyers in the UK are more than welcome to start to stand up for women and childrens rights any time they want to.

I bought the Sunday Times in Scotland and couldn't find it

The more left wing lawyers in the UK are more than welcome to start to stand up for women and childrens rights any time they want to.

They’re too busy proving how woke they are. I don’t believe in much of what her lawyer believes it, but it’s the fault of those woke and cowardly left wing lawyers, that have no respect for female rights, that she’s had to pick a right wing lawyer. The main thing I’m concerned with, is that they’re the best one for that particular job.

@ChattyLion

Personally I would have very little in common politically with that anti-choice lawyer but clearly on this one important issue it’s important that Keira and her case partner get the best lawyer they can for their specific case. He’s their lawyer. They’re not voting for him..

The more left wing lawyers in the UK are more than welcome to start to stand up for women and childrens rights any time they want to.

You raise an interesting point. Where are all the left wing and feminist lawyers when you need them?

Kiera's lawyer is a specialist in Judicial Reviews. She needs someone who knows this area of law. I would imagine issues around his religious beliefs are being raised to stir the pot and to detract from the actual case.

I'm aware that @Belstaffie will be live tweeting from court on Twitter.

Sorry forgot twitter link
twitter.com/Belstaffie/status/1313213477494939648?s=19

Also on Facebook XX Power Nation
www.facebook.com/1044704242398318/posts/1535257796676291/

Oh, good, I'll follow Belstffie.

Such an important case, that's great that someone has the time and energy - and touch typing skills - to share with us what happens.

The baseball bat-wielding QC is complaining on twitter that the JR will not hear any trans child voices. He says:

The case against the Tavistock, seeking (in effect) to deny trans kids in the UK treatment that is available throughout the rest of the developed world, will hear no submissions from trans kids. They, and charities representing them, asked to be heard but were denied all voice.

Several organisations who seek to deny them treatment will be heard. And professionals who treat them will be too. But it is profoundly shocking - redolent of men in The Handmaid's Tale deciding on women's futures - that those most affected should be shut out.

twitter.com/JolyonMaugham/status/1313168858556116993?s=20

twitter.com/JolyonMaugham/status/1313168862070874114?s=20

I'm convinced he enjoys gas lighting and trolling women with that Handmaid's Tale reference, after he's spent the last few years dismissing women's right to speak for themselves and blocking any woman who doesn't support his ideology.

In any case the crowdfunding updates say that one of the submissions is from a 13 year old trans-child so unless he knows something new, I'm not sure how he can make this claim.

Oh honestly that’s just shameful. ‘Those most affected’ aren’t being ‘shut out’.
They’re bringing the bloody case.

Any political doctrine which encourages kids to take on terrible permanent health risks and harms, and encourages the child to sign up uncomprehendingly for immense adult losses of natural human function ...just to gain in-group political validation and apparently for cosmetic sexual acceptance by future partners, should take a very long hard look at itself.

It almost seems as if today’s genderist doctrine needs kids to be doing all this because something about their movement doesn’t look as good, if children don't do it.

G'wan Keira!