Stonewall admit they didn't understand.

[WarriorN]

x.com/stonewalluk/status/1782463071866286105?s=46&t=A2fpFNgDRyXF2d6ye97wEA

And they're still reading it

www.stonewall.org.uk/cass-review

Yes I'd like to know which MPs are their 'contacts'? It sounds quite sinister as in they have some sort of control over these MPs. Stonewall speaks and they obey!

Had all the humans left the room to their support dogs?

Do we guess to whom the support peacock is affiliated?

Much as I love Moley’s work I think this one is unfair. There are intelligent working breeds around that table. A table of dogs would have produced a better briefing than Stonewall’s humans.

It should sounds like that. The report has a methodology section after all.

It certainly sounds like they are scientifically illiterate. The message that started all this off was from the BMJ which said only two research papers (of about 100) were high quality. Anyone who knows anything about evaluating evidence would know this was clearly communicating that there is a very poor evidence base for healthcare for children expressing gender incongruence. But the scientifically illiterate TRAs took it to mean Cass threw out reports she did not like.

Honestly, I’m embarrassed for them. they may have well as jumped up and down in Trafalgar Square shouting ‘ I’m a bit thick! I’m a bit thick! I don’t know what I am talking about, but I won’t let that stop me!’
Its quite good really, that they have so publicly manifest their complete detachment from understanding even the very basics of evidence gathering, reviews and the scientific process, really.

I see they are still attached to the political and unevidenced concept of the ‘trans child’.

Stonewall's explanation for screwing up reaction to the Cass report on twitter has been community noted:

Readers added context
The "Approach" chapter of the Cass Report outlines the methodological approach used i.e. the how and the why research is graded.

The report outlines the "Pyramid of standards of evidence" on page 55 and explains the GRADE system which helps summarise the quality of evidence.

cass.independent-review.uk/wp-content/upl…

Short but sweet.

How humiliating for them.

I wondered what was going on, until I saw the little footnote, apparently Barclays were recalculated and moved to position 32 to reflect the change in scores.

I've just become a community noter <flexes>

Enjoyed my contributions last night!

Reading between the lines:

"We're going to have to admit that the 'trans child' doesn't exist and that pharmaceutical and surgical interventions are not only unnecessary but actively damaging. We're going to have to concede that gender distressed children DO exist but that their gender distress is often a secondary sympton to a primary condition such as neurodiversity, depression, or unprocessed trauma. Once we do this, the whole trans edifice will start to collapse and we'll just be left with a bunch of angry straight dudes in dresses, since we alienated our core lesbian and gay community a long time ago. This is going to be incredibly embarrassing, so we'll drag our feet and spin it out until the last person to leave Stonewall HQ turns out the lights."

If Stonewall were a research paper, they would not be of sufficient quality to have made it into the Cass Report.

😁

No surprise the Scottish Government is in the top 50. 😕

Perhaps a FOI request would give the names?

Well how did they think they were going to get away with that blatant lie!? Anyone can fact check with the report and see that it actually was very clear in the report how they graded the research.

It is quite glorious though seeing TRAs usually tactics of smearing ‘opponents’ ( in their eyes) and lying not working out for them with Dr Hilary Cass and her report.

They must be really shocked. It’s worked so well for them for over a decade. But no one’s buying it this time.

And it’s just exposing them for the lying, slandering, thick, incompetent and scientifically illiterate bunch they actually are.

The whole debacle demonstrates how few people appear to understand the difference between credible sources and various forms of methodology, in several ways.

Not only did they not bother to read the report or just plain didn't understand it, they took various vox pops from social media and either parroted them or misinterpreted them (perhaps the BMJ)

This obviously has massive implications when influencing policy and is all the more chilling when it's about the care of vulnerable children.

The public inquiry has in fact started as they're demonstrating in real time to everyone, with transparency, exactly what they've been doing for years.

Exactly! Well put

It’s also the answer to your pp

Well how did they think they were going to get away with that blatant lie!?

Well how did they think they were going to get away with that blatant lie!? Anyone can fact check with the report and see that it actually was very clear in the report how they graded the research.

I can only suppose that they don't have anyone scientifically literate or realise that if so they should check with someone who is before making any sort of statement.

Haven't they been getting away with blatant lies for years? Like "gender identity" being one of the protected characteristics, when the whole Equality Act 2010 is online for anyone to check.

You can see why they might think they'd get away with another one.

Interpreting and communicating medical data is basically my day job, so I'm not surprised by the lack of scientific literacy displayed by Stonewall et al. What never ceases to amaze me is the sheer arrogance of those who confidently make claims about things they patently don't understand. How could it not occur to them to think "hmmm, this is an independent review conducted by some pretty knowledgeable people over several years and chaired by someone with immense expertise, perhaps I should check my own understanding before proclaiming they did a bad job, just in case it turns out they knew what they were doing". It's just a further extension of the appalling 'people are tired of experts' narrative that has produced so many toxic effects.

Huge respect to Dr Cass not just for the report itself but for fearlessly calling out the bullshitters.

Amazon UK in the top 100 - I guess we can only aspire to their working practices!

Ben Cooper has a support wren.

Does RMW have the support peacock?

ETA: just noticed RMW on TwiX is still retwiXing 'evidence' that Cass is wrong/biased/corrupt etc.. Must go and see how well RMW's latest with Andrew Doyle is aging.

https://twitter.com/moira_robin

https://twitter.com/GBNEWS/status/1782138860601852091

What never ceases to amaze me is the sheer arrogance of those who confidently make claims about things they patently don't understand.

I fear it's part of a 'two cultures' problem... some of these people don't know what they don't know.

@EasternStandard

But Dr Cass is a powerhouse. Look at how squarely she backs these ideologues down.

Yes, what a perfect choice to lead this review. Absolutely unparalleled in credibility, and now showing exactly how robust her chops are.

I think that's the thing that boggles me the most - the concept of being unaware of the limits of your own knowledge and expertise. I call it arrogance, maybe it's something else, I don't know.

RMW comes over as incredibly dense in that interview.

They couldn't correctly read the graph they had provided, it gave data up to 2016 not 2014 that RMW twice stated, RMW couldn't remember the name of the US medical association he was trying to quote and google has no record of the 9000 people study released from Perth Aus in the last few weeks.