Unbelievable projection from Jane Fae on puberty blockers

[xxyzz]

With breathtaking chutzpah, Fae claims in an article in the Independent that the "the consequences could be devastating" for those children no longer allowed easy access to puberty blockers.

Fae worries that there has been no no "risk assessment for those affected" (unlike all the non-existent risk-assessments for putting the poor kids on puberty blockers in the first place).

"Whatever happened to “first, do no harm”?" Fae asks, in a really outrageous piece of DARVO.

"In the case of puberty blockers and Hormone replacement Therapy (HRT), the adverse physical and psychological effects are equally well-documented." Fae says. But no, this is not Fae suddenly accepting reality. It continues: "We know, for instance, that women who suddenly have HRT withdrawn may become suicidal." So it is withdrawal that Fae objects to, not the filling of innocent children with dangerous and untested medication in the first place. The article continues with more unproven, dangerous assertions that children are being driven to suicide as a result of not being able to get hold of blockers.

www.independent.co.uk/voices/transgender-court-ruling-puberty-blockers-b1766456.html

You'd think the Independent, which reports all of this uncritically, must have no idea that biological sex is an indelible characteristic or that men's treatment of women underlies many young girls' unhappiness with their birth sex. And yet, on the same day, they publish this:

www.independent.co.uk/news/world/africa/baby-making-factory-nigeria-ogun-b1766419.html

Unfuckingbelievable.

Apparently Fae, like Mermaids, with no medical or legal training whatsoever (just one heck of a lot of personal skin in the game) feels they know better than the court and the Tavistock who provided all the evidence for this for impartial legal fact finding and evaluation.

Yes, it's shocking that rather than grandfather clausing PBs, or even giving time to the Tavistock to do this carefully, the judge felt the situation was serious enough (and so apparently did the NHS) that every child on blockers will need to have a court judgement on whether they can continue them. It says a great deal to anyone with a brain and care for children that a judge weighed up the evidence, considered the best interests of the children and chose this route.

Yes, this is going to cause immense distress and alarm to those poor kids, not least because of the distorted and hyperbolic/dramatized information some adults have chosen to whip up around them for their own personal agendas. Tavistock, one hopes, will deal with this a lot more responsibly than they've dealt with the situation that got these children into this awful position in the first place.

But when you discover that something awful and illegal is happening to children, you don't carry on with it because it would upset the children if you stop. You deal with the fact that it should never have been bloody allowed to happen in the first place and then you help those affected to pick up the pieces.

All this drama and feelings does not change the law: it was not even relevant enough to be part of the case. It does not make a wrong thing right. Being Very Upset does not overthrow a 'no'.

@Typesofcatalogue

Tackling the underlying reasons why someone wants to opt out of their sex is the issue. Complete failure to do that, might be a premise for medical transition. But until every other avenue is explored, in my opinion, it shouldn't happen.

But you’re completely overlooking the possibility that there are biological aspects influencing gender dysphoria. You might not accept that prenatal hormones can influence brain development. But brain tissue is sensitive to sex hormones, including (particularly?) during development. It is possible that can affect psychosexual development.

We might never know 100% for sure because you can’t really look inside someone’s brain and see identity and sexuality. It might be biological/ physical combined with cultural. Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.

Well that's why I said unless they find a physical cause.

Currently, the diagnosis for gender dysphoria is not based on a physical cause. Going by that, no child should have any medical intervention, at all.

I'd be more convinced, if the children who claim to have an opposite sex identity didn't entirely rely on stereotypes to describe it.

Or adults, for that matter.

I have asked, over and over, for adult males to describe what it is about themselves that they believe is female, and I've never had an answer that wasn't a stereotype.

We've had because I aspire to be passive and submissive, because I'm girly, because I like romcoms, because I like bright colours, because it makes me feel 'vibrant' and lately, because I wanted to be one of the 'mean girls' portrayed in a fictitious Hollywood movie. In some cases, because I hate toxic masculinity/don't feel masculine.

The definition of a woman is not a man who doesn't feel masculine.

You really have to wonder at the self awareness of those public figures vigorously disagreeing with this judgement. They couldn't be making it clearer that no one's rights or ethics or law or anything should get in the way of the outcomes they want.

It couldn't be a stronger demonstration of why those with skin in the game should absolutely not be making decisions for other groups, particularly children, nor be permitted involvement or influence over those making such decisions.

It might be biological/ physical combined with cultural. Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence

And none of that is basis for policy, practice or law.

This was a court case to look at hard evidence and to impartially decide upon it. That's what law should be based on.

But you’re completely overlooking the possibility that there are biological aspects influencing gender dysphoria. You might not accept that prenatal hormones can influence brain development. But brain tissue is sensitive to sex hormones, including (particularly?) during development. It is possible that can affect psychosexual development.

How can prenatal hormones make someone think they're female, targeting a very specific, very precise thought process, but, in every single part of their anatomy, entire DNA, and every cell of their body make them male?

Apart from anything else, your reproductive biological potential, is what makes you male or female. That's all it is. A description of reproductive biology. It's not a description of a thought process.

Secondly, it's physically impossible to make somebody into the opposite sex. However they think, whatever underlying reason you might think has caused it. Cutting off body parts, inducing simulations of others, and fashioning bits of skin into something that might resemble a body part, doesn't achieve a 'sex change'.

@MichelleofzeResistance

You really have to wonder at the self awareness of those public figures vigorously disagreeing with this judgement. They couldn't be making it clearer that no one's rights or ethics or law or anything should get in the way of the outcomes they want.

It couldn't be a stronger demonstration of why those with skin in the game should absolutely not be making decisions for other groups, particularly children, nor be permitted involvement or influence over those making such decisions.

It's quite a satisfying phenomenon, in a way.

As each layer is pulled off, examined, and rejected, the next layer comes up to take its place. And very quickly, we're getting to the crux of it.

@AyeRobot

Oh, knit off, Fae

proper made me chucklesnort

But when you discover that something awful and illegal is happening to children, you don't carry on with it because it would upset the children if you stop. You deal with the fact that it should never have been bloody allowed to happen in the first place and then you help those affected to pick up the pieces.

Michelle absolutely right.

There was a piece in the telegraph rightly examining the implications for schools in how they approach both the teaching and logistics of toilets and changing rooms etc yesterday.

The sooner this is worked into official safeguarding training scenarios, the better.

Yup. Agree with all that! Plus, if gender dysphoria is the result of prenatal exposure to hormones - the mothers', presumably? - how does catalogue account for the 5000% increase in teenage girls experiencing it? What was happening to pregnant women 10-20 years ago that had never happened before? Is it the internet?! 😳 Or what?

Telegraph article, no access personally. headline says it all:

www.telegraph.co.uk/education-and-careers/2020/12/04/light-keira-bell-case-schools-need-look-approach-transgender/

@NewlyGranny

Yup. Agree with all that! Plus, if gender dysphoria is the result of prenatal exposure to hormones - the mothers', presumably? - how does catalogue account for the 5000% increase in teenage girls experiencing it? What was happening to pregnant women 10-20 years ago that had never happened before? Is it the internet?! 😳 Or what?

Mobile phones springs to mind if anyone really wants to go down that conspiracy rabbit hole. 😁

@Clymene

I can't read that because Christine Burns MBE has blocked me on Twitter. I had the temerity to disagree about something once and we all know women who express opinions should be cast out.

I've archived the tweets here:

archive.vn/xL1Gu

@NewlyGranny

Yup. Agree with all that! Plus, if gender dysphoria is the result of prenatal exposure to hormones - the mothers', presumably? - how does catalogue account for the 5000% increase in teenage girls experiencing it? What was happening to pregnant women 10-20 years ago that had never happened before? Is it the internet?! 😳 Or what?

Or ten girls in one class coming out at once. Or, coincidently, 76 children identifying as trans in one school - in Brighton.

account for the 5000% increase in teenage girls experiencing it?

It’s entirely possible (and likely imo) that there are a minority of cases of gender dysphoria caused by a genuine cross sex gender identity, and at the same time a recent increase in cases caused by other societal factors. Factors that are affecting girls, leading them to think they have genuine GID but they do not.

The two things are not mutually exclusive.

That tweet! Children suffering from gender dysphoria are somehow more mature than all other children, so they can consent to puberty blockers, which will make them less mature than all other children.

Somehow, that person, has decided that a certain group of children for whom medication would result in remaining prepubescent, are more mature than any other children, and can consent to the treatment?

The layers are coming off the onion thick and fast.

@Typesofcatalogue

account for the 5000% increase in teenage girls experiencing it?

It’s entirely possible (and likely imo) that there are a minority of cases of gender dysphoria caused by a genuine cross sex gender identity, and at the same time a recent increase in cases caused by other societal factors. Factors that are affecting girls, leading them to think they have genuine GID but they do not.

The two things are not mutually exclusive.

What is a genuine cross gender identity?

So it's based mainly on stereotypes apart from the first point and the last two.

And it’s only the last two that are a concern.

Children’s worlds are highly gendered, even when you bring them up not to be, most gravitate towards a gendered form of self expression. Including gender non conforming children.

How can prenatal hormones make someone think they're female, targeting a very specific, very precise thought process, but, in every single part of their anatomy, entire DNA, and every cell of their body make them male?

Datun you know it’s not as simple as that. The sense of oneself as a male or female is developmental. It starts developing before age 3 and whilst for most people their eventual sense of what sex they are is strongly based on their physical sex, it isn’t for absolutely everyone.

Some people look in the mirror and the sex of the person reflected there feels wrong or is perceived as being the opposite sex. It’s not just based on stereotypes.

@NeurotrashWarrior

Telegraph article, no access personally. headline says it all:

www.telegraph.co.uk/education-and-careers/2020/12/04/light-keira-bell-case-schools-need-look-approach-transgender/

From that Telegraph article:

Schools need therefore to consider adopting a “watch and wait” approach, which neither affirms the child as the opposite sex, nor attempts to force them to conform to sex stereotypes. So they could allow a boy to wear a skirt, for example, but not to use the girls’ changing-rooms.

Good start.

Followed by calling out organisations who have been giving bad advice, and which has been subsequently banned.

They will also need to review their use of external resources, many of which appear to tacitly or openly endorse the use of puberty blockers. Typical examples are the Trans Inclusion School Toolkit produced by the charity Allsorts Youth Project and the Cornwall Schools Transgender Guidance, both of which have been adopted, with minor variations, by some local authorities and schools. Widely-used guidelines from Stonewall and the PSHE Association (an organisation for teachers of personal, social, health and economic education) similarly discuss the use of puberty blockers. Trans charities Gires and Mermaids have provided training to teachers that talks about puberty blockers, with one Mermaids trainer describing them as “completely reversible” and providing “immense relief from the dysphoria”.

Some people look in the mirror and the sex of the person reflected there feels wrong or is perceived as being the opposite sex. It’s not just based on stereotypes.

What is it based on, in that case?

I mean you said it yourself Typesofcatalogue, The world is highly gendered. And children's especially.

There won't be a child alive who is not affected by it.