Guardian editorial on Cass, as painful to read as they clearly found it to write

[GenderBlender]

Waaaaay to mealy mouthed to summarise

But this doozy of a line

"Dr Cass advocates moving away from supporting children with gender dysphoria with puberty blockers and cross sex hormones to providing therapy to “alleviate their distress”. Her belief rests on making a connection between the rise in girls experiencing a mental health crisis and the rise of girls developing gender-related distress. Such an assumption lays Dr Cass open to the charge that her suggestions are tantamount to talking people out of their desired gender change. However, she disputes that her intent is to “change the person’s perception of who they are”. The report’s credibility will be significantly undermined if that objective is not met."

So, this thorough, detailed, comprehensive, systematic piece of work will be undone unless it reinforces the idea that gender identity is real. That is the most important thing in all of this according to the Guardian.

Not the children harmed.
Not the brutal and determined silencing of those who have been desperately trying to alert to this scandal.
Not their role in propagating the harm to children and their role in silencing the gender critics.

Nope. Identity Uber alles.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2024/apr/11/the-guardian-view-on-the-cass-report-rising-numbers-of-gender-distressed-young-people-need-help

What else were you expecting from the Gruan? After the WPATH debacle and now this, you might have expected a little reverse ferreting (christ, even Mermaids and Stonewall have made an effort in that direction). I suspect the Gruan will be like one of those Japanese soldiers found in the jungle 20 years after WW2 refusing to surrender. Total headbangers.

Was just about to say exactly the same @lonelywater! The guardian has its heels dug in on all sorts of social issues like this. It’s what it exists for. There is no balanced opinion it will just twist everything to meet its activist-loving, institution hating narrative. It’ll never give in, it’s its brand.

Reading that has been the end of my long term readership of the Guardian. I really thought they'd see sense. But you're all correct, it could never have been different really.

It’s making a serious loss , so it must need money.

Big Pharma has lots of money.

These two statements are both objectively true and do not imply any connexion.

Wow, that's truly shit! Especially as an Editorial / Guardian View, not an opinion piece. And it's clearly aimed at the US market.

Strangely the Guardian has also had some really good articles on the Cass review.

I second this. Particularly the headbangers bit.

Wrong link? That article isn’t about Cass.

The guardian no doubt make their money not from paper sales or subscription, but from something else. Supplying a narrative, perhaps?

They’re funded by the Bell Trust I believe, a non-profit set up to support independent journalism.

It's headlined

"The Guardian view on the Cass report: rising numbers of gender distressed young people need help "

Now I will go read it...

I was looking at the second link in the OP - the one under the picture. I didn’t notice that there were 2 different links.

The Scot Trust - benefitting from off-shore tax breaks in good old LUX socialist fashion - is set up to keep the Guardian toerag going in perpetuity. I have been reading the G all my life since I was a teen. I still hate read them now and then. I hold that newspaper responsible for my becoming a conservative.

Agree, there have been some excellent articles I suspect be jounos who have been muzzled til now. But that editorial is a weasely shit show with McConnell's finger prints all over it

I’m annoyed it got this far. They are making us argue over something everyone knew was completely ridiculous and should never have begun in the first place. It’s awful how easily the schools and medical professionals got their teeth into our kids and how easily men got into female bathrooms

And then theres’s the appeal after the article.

This is what we're up against

Teams of lawyers from the rich and powerful trying to stop us publishing stories they don’t want you to see.
Lobby groups with opaque funding who are determined to undermine facts about the climate emergency and other established science.
Authoritarian states with no regard for the freedom of the press.
Bad actors spreading disinformation online to undermine democracy.

Lawyers trying to block stories? Anti-science lobby groups with opaque funding? Online disinformation? Who does that sound like????

The language in that quote in the OP is so belittling - "her beliefs", "her suggestions". They don't reflect the four years of work that went into the 388 page report.

The Observer should have some good articles come Sunday.

I found this line particularly interesting

This review is not a full stop in the debate, but part of a continuing conversation.

After years of "no debate" it seems the goon have finally developed past their Kevin the teenager stage. They'll be fancying girls soon. Let's hope the "continuing conversation" doesn't involve abusing women who got us to this point.

I just CBevenA to read this. The paper lost me the first time it used “she” to refer to a man and I don’t feel like being kind and giving it a second chance. It bends over backwards to arselick the TQIAdouble plus alphabet people to the point where it reads like a parody. Plus it treated Suzanne Moore really badly.

Thanks for the link but I didn't make it past, 'Her belief'.

Gender distressed

Even that phrase!

Its nonsensical

I've just steeled myself to read it. Although there were several troublesome lines in it, the overall impression was of vacuity and blandness - the consequence I suppose of it having been written not to serve the public but to find a compromise format that would satisfy staff members who are committed to an angry continuation of the ideological approach that Cass has delineated.
It was the guardian writing for itself.
This seems to be one of the consequences of this whole sorry situation - institutions turning inwards to satisfy the preoccupations of their staff, instead of saying true to their wider function. It is evident in the Edinburgh Rape Crisis Centre tribunal, and in the refusal of the NHS adult gender services to cooperate with research.
Since the guardian has managed to write some good articles on Cass, I can only hope that the strangely thrown together editorial was part of the heated deal they are having to thrash out in their staff meetings, to enable them to report more factually on this issue in future.

Well that was ground out through gritted teeth!

Useful.

'Dr Cass advocates moving away from supporting children with gender dysphoria with puberty blockers and cross sex hormones to providing therapy to “alleviate their distress”. Her belief rests on making a connection between the rise in girls experiencing a mental health crisis and the rise of girls developing gender-related distress. Such an assumption lays Dr Cass open to the charge that her suggestions are tantamount to talking people out of their desired gender change.'

Note the casting of Cass' findings as her personal 'belief'.

This points to one of the next area in the spotlight: conversion therapy bills. As had been noted, the Cass review would potentially have laid her open to criminal charges if construed as 'conversion therapy'.

They worked so hard not to offend anyone, and failed. There will be tantrums over the words:

a distinctly modern phenomenon.

"alleviate their distress" with all finger-quotes.
Like sterilisation, osteoperosis in their 20s, never having an orgasm and multiple dangerous surgeries would be a better solution, but I guess we could try to "alleviate their distress"