Lmao at JOB dealing with Cass

[m00ngirl]

Incredible umming and ahhing on James o'Brien's LBC radio show this morning about Cass Review. After being part of the witch hunt now of course he's doing a Mr Rational word salad devoid of self reflection.

"How to be right" my arse.

Turning this insufferable crap off now but would be quite funny were it not so serious.

I've been waiting for this. I listened to a clip just now professing to be "uncertainty phobic" and how this topic doesn't interest him for that reason.....then preached to listeners. "if you have engaged in this debate at all you've probably perpetuated some of the toxicity that Hilary Cass describes unless of course you try to do what I do which is to say you're sometimes both as bad as each other, and then everybody hates you". What a an enormous slimy bawbag.

JOB's favourite line has always been "am I missing something".

Yes, James, your tuchus with both hands...

This has been the most obvious thing to anyone who has taken even a moment to think about it, rather than outsourcing one's thinking to liars and fraudsters and be-kind idiots.

@HowdidImanagetohavetwoaccountaandthenloseboth Jolyon is one of those parents Helen Joyce talks about. So don't waste your energy.

It's unethical to do this type of control study on kids - like giving one a parachute and one none when the plane is crashing

I expect we hold different ideas as to whether the blockers or the control group are the ones with the parachute!

That was my suspicion, especially during Brexit when there seemed to be a ready queue of utter morons willing to humiliate themselves on national radio.

Tomorrow is your day to shine and try

I have actually got through once, during the pandemic. I was grilled by the researcher, had to hold on for 20 minutes then was talked over and interrupted by the host. I was absolutely right about what I was trying to tell them. It is all orchestrated.

Well gravity is more complex than people know and whether a thing is on the ground or in the air is not an exact clear cut science. So yeah kids can fly if powerful men with vestrd interests and a complete disregard for women say so. And if they hit the ground that didn't really happen or isn't a big deal.

I think they have 'regular callers' that the staff will call up on slow days.

JOB has/had a 'popular' show and could probably have relied upon enough 'stupid' people phoning in during the Brexit years.

He's a one trick pony that relies upon his staff screening callers to queue up 'stupid' people for him to ridicule. If somebody articulate managers to slip through the net, he just puts them on mute and waffles for five minutes before cutting to commercials. It's so transparent, that I'm amazed/saddened when anybody I respect declares themselves to be a fan.

If I'm ever listening to LBC when his show starts, it's a scramble to change the channel before he starts talking.

This.
I usually like him and agree with a great deal of what he has to say but not on this gender woo. You can take 'Be kind' far too far.
So I don't really listen to him at the moment because I'm to annoyed with him. He has a wife and 2 daughters fgs.

It's unethical to do this type of control study on kids - like giving one a parachute and one none when the plane is crashing

The plane is crashing you say?

Oh dear.
Perhaps read the actual report, before you offer someone else’s opinion….

What did the ever delightful Fred have to say?

MishyJDI · Yesterday 14:12

The Cass Report is already discredited. It is a political positioning. Extremely Sad. They dismissed most studies showing the success of blockers because they were not double blinded control studies and newer studies of the last two years.

That's complete and utter rubbish, some extremists have criticised it, as is their right, but they haven't been honest. How could there have been double blinded trials, when the practitioners didn't do hones science, or even follow ups?

Cass states her methodology in the report. All analyses and statistical methodology have been through two layers of expert checks and approved.

The practitioners did not even follow their own guidelines, in taking referrals from Secondary Care Practitioners, almost half came from GPs and Social Services, rather than from CAHMS. They also didn't bother to look into mental health and other co-morbidities.

Please stop cutting and pasting uninformed Twitter propaganda.

Honest science, not hone!

His view on same-sex care for disabled women:

"I've been recording podcasts all afternoon & obviously couldn't dash anything off quickly. I don't think I can answer this to your satisfaction, Henrietta. Sorry. But I'll try. I believe at the same time that people can be born in to the wrong body and that a person who doesn't believe this shouldn't be forced to accept that it's true. Especially, now you have made me aware of the scenario, disabled women in need of intimate care. If I was in charge of your care I would want to agree to your requests and then I would be unable to explain to a trans woman, proven let's say to be a brilliant carer for other disabled women, why this was fair. That said, I would personally prioritise the feelings of anyone in your position over hers so my answer to your central question is yes. I would like to ask this question on air at some point & have followed you so we can find a way for you to contribute to that conversation (should you want to, of course!)"

x.com/mrjamesob/status/1778459506340491340

Just to add that my mum was (temporarily) in a care home where she was showered by male carers and she found it distressing.

Surely 'a brilliant carer' would take account of the wishes of the person they cared for?

I would want to agree to your requests and then I would be unable to explain to a trans woman, proven let's say to be a brilliant carer for other disabled women, why this was fair.

How have we arrived at the point where profoundly disabled women have a responsibility to protect the feelings of deluded men? The patient is paramount. Their consent to be cared for by any individual is paramount. There is no competing consideration. We used to know this.

Exactly. You can't be a brilliant carer if you lie about your sex and then expect people you're caring for to erode their boundaries in order to make you feel good about yourself. A TW can be a brilliant carer if they acknowledge they're male (and meet all other criteria for brilliant care). If they're involved in any care purported to be single sex and they pretend they're actually a biological woman...not brilliant at all.

We have an elderly female relative who requires carers. They are so careful about consent they can't even wash her if she declines (which is what they're there for) as she is considered to have fluctuating mental capacity so sometimes lucid enough to decide for herself. In theory.

Why would anyone want to force their 'care' on an unconsenting client?

Unless....🙄

Edited for clarity.

I know a bloke who has retrained in middle age and qualified as a carer. He specifically hopes to work with elderly and other adult males who feel uncomfortable getting intimate care from women. It can work that way round too. And I bet those men (thinking of a few uncles) would hate having a male who presented as a transwoman offering their care.

Someone should ask JOB about that, too.

I felt so bad for my mum. She was sexually abused as a child and she felt very scared being showered by a male carer (who only ever acted appropriately - but that’s not the point). She only told us after she was discharged, if I’d known I would have put a stop to it.

Yes, yes they would.

Sorry your mum had to experience that.

Same sex intimate care should be the standard offer - not some special extra that needs to be requested. Deffo feels like we’ve gone alarmingly backwards on this.