Good Law project have succeeded...

[Wandawomble]

goodlawproject.org/news/tavistock-success/

This thread perfectly encapsulates the horrific situation we have found ourselves in with regards to puberty blockers for children in gender clinics. All of the 8 criteria set out by the three judges are 100% accurate. They were developed from the evidence - or lack thereof - for their use.

Not a single poster who comes here to tell us we are wrong, nor a single person who rails publicly against the judgment in the Bell/Mrs A vs Tavistock, nor anyone who is involved in appealing against that ruling, can explain why they think any of the 8 criteria are wrong. Instead, we get distraction, ignoring, pretending they don’t exist or at very best, told that “different opinions” can exist.

These are children we are talking about FFS. We are talking about a monumentally important medical decision that has lifelong consequences for children, and people are not willing to set aside their ideological stance to engage, discuss or present one thing that might provide countenance. How do these people live with themselves? Even if just one person acknowledged that puberty blockers cause harm but they think the benefits outweigh the risks, and explain why with evidence it would be a start. But to completely ignore what is happening to children, to completely ignore the consequences these decisions have, in my opinion means only one thing: these children don’t matter to these people. These children are just pawns in their bigger game. Why else would the health of children matter so little to them they can’t even be bothered to formulate a rebuttal? As long as I have breath in my body I will never forget the people who glossed over, ignored, or refused to acknowledge the impact these drugs have on children and pursued this legal pathway for their own selfish gains.

Once again, these are the criteria that we are asking children and their parents to understand:

i) the immediate consequences of the treatment in physical and psychological terms;
(ii) the fact that the vast majority of patients taking puberty blocking drugs proceed to taking cross-sex hormones and are, therefore, a pathway to much greater medical interventions;
(iii) the relationship between taking cross-sex hormones and subsequent surgery, with the implications of such surgery;
(iv) the fact that cross-sex hormones may well lead to a loss of fertility;
(v) the impact of cross-sex hormones on sexual function;
(vi) the impact that taking this step on this treatment pathway may have on future and life-long relationships;
(vii) the unknown physical consequences of taking puberty blocking drugs; and
(viii) the fact that the evidence base for this treatment is as yet highly uncertain

These are children as young as 11. Why does no one have the courage of their convictions to explain how children can understand these things? Why does no one have the courage of their convictions to explain how it’s ok for parents to decide to do this to their children? There are only two possible explanations: either these 8 criteria cannot be rebutted, and these people would rather not admit they could be wrong on this, or these people are only in it for themselves and the children don’t actually matter.

Either way, I won’t forget.

@BlackWaveComing

Men giving way in lifts - what century are we in? Truly? Men giving way in lifts (doesn't happen in my somewhat egalitarian town) is not a marker of womanhood. Neither is friends greeting with a kiss.

No difference...smh...such denial of the lifelong impacts of being born female.

I had to laugh along with you on this. Certainly in the town you speak of it doesn’t happen, nor in London so much. Not based on my experience of almost as long as Robin’s.

And most of my friends, male and female, greet each other with kisses (pre-Covid). Females kissing male and female friends is nothing unusual.

These examples are not supporting any points that the poster intended. Maybe some superficial assumptions though are being shown more clearly.

The examples, as given by the poster, give the strong impression of roleplay. Not necessarily a problem so long as everyone understands that.

@Datun

Well, there are the funny parts, like men explaining technical things to me very slowly

This is why you will never get it. You are implying that these men think you are female, but clearly, you will never understand that treating females as lesser than isn't 'funny'.

It's the cornerstone of a patriarchy which leads to the oppression of women everywhere.

Yes Datun. That sentiment really irked me. My reading of it was Robin thinks it is funny because Robin knows these men are responding to Robin as female. Women don't find it funny because they know these men are responding to Robin as female.

These are children as young as 11. Why does no one have the courage of their convictions to explain how children can understand these things? Why does no one have the courage of their convictions to explain how it’s ok for parents to decide to do this to their children? There are only two possible explanations: either these 8 criteria cannot be rebutted, and these people would rather not admit they could be wrong on this, or these people are only in it for themselves and the children don’t actually matter.

Either way, I won’t forget.

This ^^

Life changing medication with no proven benefit, significant negative impact on health and a high rate of misdiagnosis.

It’s not good.

These are children as young as 11. Why does no one have the courage of their convictions to explain how children can understand these things? Why does no one have the courage of their convictions to explain how it’s ok for parents to decide to do this to their children? There are only two possible explanations: either these 8 criteria cannot be rebutted, and these people would rather not admit they could be wrong on this, or these people are only in it for themselves and the children don’t actually matter.

It's very stark. You've asked over and over. We are all waiting for it to be addressed.

It isn't. Nothing. Nada. Zilch.

Yes Datun. That sentiment really irked me. My reading of it was Robin thinks it is funny because Robin knows these men are responding to Robin as female. Women don't find it funny because they know these men are responding to Robin as female.

Indeed. And, according to robin, its even funnier when those men were swiftly 'put right' and stopped their behaviour.

I don't image that the cessation of sexism being 'hilarious' is most women's primary reaction. Relief yes, mirth no.

Not to mention that for many women actually having superior knowledge isn't the sexism slayer robin imagines. Frequently it's quite the opposite. There is nothing like the misogyny of a threatened man.

Same thing really. He asked me to describe the 27 Litre Merlin engine I use occasionally and the 'vehicle' it lives in. Mr mechanic had his chin on the floor. It was very funny

It does sound as if you enjoyed the sense/feeling of two 'privileges' there. The 'privilege' of being called "Lady", and experiencing a tiny little reflection of what women experience routinely and quite profoundly; but also the fall back 'privilege' born out of a life and a knowledge gained through having lived 'otherwise'.

These are children as young as 11. Why does no one have the courage of their convictions to explain how children can understand these things?

Bears repeating.

Courage of conviction is a very apt term.

'Yes Datun. That sentiment really irked me. My reading of it was Robin thinks it is funny because Robin knows these men are responding to Robin as female. Women don't find it funny because they know these men are responding to Robin as female.'

Yawn. If your only response to the viccissitudes of life is rage, then you will live a harder life and make less progress than you might otherwise. My whole working life has involved making progress for different groups in the workplace. But you stick with your rage and I will adopt the more positive, educational and nuanced approach (with an occasional iron fist in a tribunal). I'd love to think you might include trans people (of all ages) in that but some folk here seem to find that impossible. You have my sympathy.

This may be deleted but women do know what sex people are. Something to do with an innate sense, I think men also know but I have only asked a few. A survey would reveal interesting results. Passing is a strange word and isn't used, at least I've never heard it used, by a woman except when quoting

Yawn. If your only response to the viccissitudes of life is rage

If the increasing misogyny reported daily across the globe isn't inducing rage in you, it's because you don't see it.

@Floisme

Whether the judges got the extent of the necessary information right in Bell is another matter, and will be re-examined on appeal. Different views are possible. But what's your view? You're on the thread so it's kind of hard to believe you don't have an opinion. Which information - in your view - is necessary and which isn't?

Now you're back Robin I'll ask again. Notbad has raised this repeatedly and far more eloquently then me.

I think we have again the two separate experiences of someone who has chosen to opt in, and those without the option to opt out. Validation is a pleasant thing when it validates what has been intentionally chosen: those who have not chosen to be treated in this way, have no escape from it and find no pleasure in being stuck with that subordinated, tedious place in life, will obviously find it rather different.

I noted the concern about levels of paranoia. I think my own concerns are that adults who did not transition as children, who have not experienced these experimental treatments into adulthood, and who are significantly personally emotionally invested with an inevitable and very powerful personal bias, are steering what should be a very objective assessment of the situation. There are ethics. There are many questions around safety and outcomes, severe lifetime impact, and the question is not to stop transitions but whether other approaches should be available with medical transition as a last resort for children with court support to assess this, and whether this should be something a child can do when it may permanently change and damage their body in a way they may later suffer from and come to regret having been enabled by adults to do.

We repeatedly see that transitioned adults are not able to easily listen to or give credence to different views, or to engage with questions and concerns: yet those adults feel that children are able to do what they are not. And the view keeps coming up again and again that some collateral damage to others is an acceptable price to pay. And yet its never specified. How many others? How bad? Where is the line? Where is the balance of protections?

We repeatedly see that transitioned adults are not able to easily listen to or give credence to different views, or to engage with questions and concerns: yet those adults feel that children are able to do what they are not.

Indeed.

Yawn. If your only response to the viccissitudes of life is rage, then you will live a harder life and make less progress than you might otherwise

I think you are characterising and stereotyping a bit there. Raging, banshee feminists sort of thing; not the lovely, civilised genteel ladies who knows there are more than one way to skin a cat, and how to host a dinner party.......

I certainly don't post with "rage"; but some things are more than apparent, and why pussyfoot around rather than being direct and to the point? Posting is all about words on a page and points made. It is inevitable that words will be analysed and de-constructed.

Yawn. If your only response to the viccissitudes of life is rage, then you will live a harder life and make less progress than you might otherwise

Thank you for the advice on how to woman more effectively.

Frankly, I've rather got bored with being genteel and civilised in the face of sexism.
Been there, done that. That was my teens and my twenties.

Now I'm getting in touch with my feminist rage and I'm getting a lot more done.

I wonder, do you feel entitled to performatively yawn and tell them to stop getting angry if you're addressing other people about their experiences of lifelong prejudice?

The last time this happened was at a garage when I queried the need for some work on a vehicle of mine and had the ‘noddy’ explanation from the mechanic which started with the words ‘Look, lady...’. The garage owner, who knows me well, then appeared and put the mechanic right, who then apologised.

Now imagine you have been subjected to this sort of sexist attitude on an almost daily basis since you were a child (but usually without the apology you managed to get).

It's not a hilarious anecdote, it's normal day to day life for women.

Sexism isn't funny.

@OldCrone

The last time this happened was at a garage when I queried the need for some work on a vehicle of mine and had the ‘noddy’ explanation from the mechanic which started with the words ‘Look, lady...’. The garage owner, who knows me well, then appeared and put the mechanic right, who then apologised.

Now imagine you have been subjected to this sort of sexist attitude on an almost daily basis since you were a child (but usually without the apology you managed to get).

It's not a hilarious anecdote, it's normal day to day life for women.

Sexism isn't funny.

I've met my fair share of sexist mechanics, and not one of them has ever said look lady. Apart from it being something of a 1950s throw back, it's a little too direct, since many of them won't even meet my eye.

I have also never, not even once, found it remotely funny. It just isn't. It's wearing and inconvenient.

Tedious, yes, funny, no.

Same thing really. He asked me to describe the 27 Litre Merlin engine I use occasionally and the 'vehicle' it lives in. Mr mechanic had his chin on the floor. It was very funny.

What point are you trying to make here? Are you saying that men should take us seriously if we are able to 'prove' that we are knowledgeable (but not if we can't)?

Why is the default assumption that men know about engines and women don't? There are plenty of men who know nothing about engines and plenty of women who do.

Why do women have to prove themselves and men don't? Do you understand why that might make some of us a bit angry?

Women who are knowledgeable in such areas have generally had to work a lot harder to obtain that knowledge than men have, because we've first had to overcome the sexist assumptions that we shouldn't be interested, or are incapable of learning such things. This starts early - when I was in school, many subjects were considered 'for boys' or 'for girls'. I'd like to think this is no longer the case, but I'm fairly sure it is.

Yes. We are angry. Angry gets things done. Sitting passively and simpering while the world shits all over you doesn't.

The last time this happened was at a garage when I queried the need for some work on a vehicle of mine and had the ‘noddy’ explanation from the mechanic which started with the words ‘Look, lady...’. The garage owner, who knows me well, then appeared and put the mechanic right, who then apologised

Out of interest, how did the owner “put the mechanic right”?

This story puts me in mind of Alex Drummond saying “women are allowed to fix cars too”.

Di Ceglie wrote the service specifications of GIDS which they still follow. He also remains a member of the board there.

Within the principles that he asserted is the belief that children have a 'gender identity'.

The 'first case' which piqued his interest was a distressed teenage girl. Whether she had undiagnosed ASD / ADHD, had been subjected to abuse or was a lesbian no-one will know. Note how he took her case despite having no relevant experience or knowledge because he thought it would be good training opportunity and it piqued his curiosity.
journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/1359104502007003013?journalCode=ccpa

Thanks for that link R0wantrees. I couldn't access the full article from that link, but I've found an open access version here.

www.researchgate.net/publication/270564195_Castaway%27s_Corner

Same thing really. He asked me to describe the 27 Litre Merlin engine I use occasionally and the 'vehicle' it lives in. Mr mechanic had his chin on the floor. It was very funny.

Not the same thing at all. The mechanic will go right on being sexist and from the way you tell it, none of the people present seem to have actually thought that was in any way wrong.

@AnyOldPrion

Same thing really. He asked me to describe the 27 Litre Merlin engine I use occasionally and the 'vehicle' it lives in. Mr mechanic had his chin on the floor. It was very funny.

Not the same thing at all. The mechanic will go right on being sexist and from the way you tell it, none of the people present seem to have actually thought that was in any way wrong.

It's clearly pointless explaining, as I don't think Robin will ever see it.

I'm not really surprised, but it is, nonetheless, a bit of an eye-opener. Little wonder that there are so many people who have not been subjected to a life time of sexism, who see nothing wrong in medically treating children, particularly girls, who want to escape being girls.

I have asked a million times, what do they think causes gender dysphoria? It's like their analysis of the situation can only begin after the diagnosis. The actual reason for it is never addressed, it's glossed over. Or called something meaningless like a sense of self.