David Bell in today's Guardian - great article

[BonfireLady]

I'm not sure if this has been put online by the Guardian (I couldn't see it with a Google search) but there's a fantastic article from David Bell in today's print version. Hopefully legible in this photo.

Lots of different topics covered, including why calling a child "transgender" is harmful and the misrepresentation of a) the number of children and young people on puberty blockers (lots of mainstream press still saying it's fewer than 100) b) regret rates c) suicide ideation and d) the "toxicity" and "culture wars".

I think my Dad is on his way to a full peaking - it's been an interesting journey as he's a brilliant example of a kind, liberal person who values live and let live (like so many others) - he found this when reading the Guardian and made me aware of it. Thanks Dad! ❤️

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2024/apr/26/cass-review-gender-identity-services-report

That's an article from a previous day but thank you! I'm just popping out but will have another look later to see if this one has made it online.

It has today’s date on it. Are the guardian hiding it from their US customers?

It looks like they filleted the paper article to create that shorter piece on the website. There are paragraphs that appear in both it looks like.

Ah, of course they did. 🙄 Thanks for posting the full thing, OP.

It even appears in the US edition, although squirrelled away under 'World View' on the Opinions page. Always worth looking at the US edition - a bit like the Scottish and English editions of the Sun which often hold completely contradictory editorial positions on the same topic.

Thanks OP. Fantastic article.

My thought at the end of it was 'Absolutely - and the Guardian has very much been guilty of creating the atmosphere where people were scared of speaking up about the medical and social scandal unfolding'.

I would really like the Guardian to apologise for that. They did not apply acceptable standards of journalistic integrity on this topic - as those women journalists forced out will attest to.

It was a fabulous article. I am glad the Guardian published it. Think the jig is up.

“they filleted the paper article to create that shorter piece on the website”

That makes no sense. Are they worried they’re going to run out of internet?

Thanks op.

Does this mean I have to pay them money to read it in full?

Abra1t · Today 10:59

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2024/apr/26/cass-review-gender-identity-services-report

Thanks for posting that, it was informative in more ways than one. I know the Observer has been publishing balanced articles on the subject, but it seems to be a first for the actual Guardian to have published one so wholly critical. I wonder if they've reached a turning point, where GC voices are not only tolerated, but allowed to publish their opinions in it?

They did have the letters last week, of course, but to have commissioned a column seems promising.

Another thread about the online version of the article

David Bell in the Guardian www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/5062591-david-bell-in-the-guardian

What this actually means is that a more complete version - presumably with more, and more detailed - criticism would not be available online, as that is the "content" which ends up being taken up in any "viral" reaction AND being archived for the future.

The archive is particularly important, as that is (a) the record which readers and researchers will draw from and (b) the searchable record (because the print version, even if someone scans it, effectively only becomes a picture, and not a searchable one unless it's tagged.

It's quite a big deal to have print and a (n archived) digital versions of an article be very different. In the future, we will need to know what was known and what was printed, in order to be able to explain our history and politics.

Same thought went through my mind, and no doubt they will receive a few letters from people making just those points. A graceful admission from the Graun would not come amiss.

A graceful admission from the Graun would not come amiss.

Are those pigs in the sky?

It looks like now The Guardian has spoken it's socially acceptable to come out against the sterilisation of children:

https://twitter.com/lindasgrant/status/1783788727719825611

I'd recommend reading Bernadette Wren's insightful words on the subject from 2021, given that unlike Bell, she actually had a direct role in the department in question:

Bernadette Wren · Diary: Epistemic Injustice (lrb.co.uk)

Bloody rich of the Graun to be talking about this when they’ve towed the TRA line for years, including the employment of LOJ and allowing Hayley Friedman and Suzanne Moore to be hounded out.

Trying to cling onto the perceived moral high ground regardless, even as a Cass-shaped earthquake upends the landscape

The reverse ferreting has begun then

The two versions look almost identical to me (as far as I can tell from the photo in the OP).

That's such a good article from someone at the heart of the Tavistock and with a real insider's view of the catastrophe that was GIDs. The revelations of the safeguarding fails from the Sonia Appleby case still resonate. Thank heavens it's now closed.
Despite all the efforts by the adult trans lobbyists, it's becoming evident that placing the new centres in Children's hospitals with their standards of research & evidenced healthcare that all other children receive, was a genius move.
No more adults insisting that their personal anecdotes /wishes /beliefs take priority over the safety and wellbeing of vulnerable children. The multi disciplinary teams and awareness of the levels of social grooming of children will hopefully ensure that there's no place for these lobbyists. Although they're not going without a fight as we can see.

Thanks Bonfire. That is a very interesting read and interesting to see how it has been treated by the Guardian.

Absolutely. The media, politicians, journalists, celebrity, organisations. They all need to accept they were wrong and apologise for the sometimes grave harm to which they have contributed.

@ButterflyHatched thank you for the article, and the letters that followed. However, I really don’t feel ms Wren is the victim here.

As she was the person who directly oversaw the vast majority of my assessment and treatment during my time at GIDS, I am horrified at the way she has been villified. There is not a single person on Earth who I owe more to nor respect for her reasoned and measured professional conduct at the most difficult time in my life.