GLP v EHRC judgement - Thread 2

[Another2Cats]

This is a continuation thread from here:

https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5489699-glp-v-ehrc-judgement-is-coming-tomorrow?

Correct !

Exogenous hormones? Bollocks. Literally.

Anyway, back to Foxy (and his bollocks)

Rinse and repeat.

No.

I don't share your beliefs.

So has anyone heard about the GLP concert? How are tickets sales going ?

"King's Counsel" is rather like a life peerage, it's a title & comes via a Letter Patent, LPs are hard to rescind & it's rarely done. Maugham has allowed his Bar Council practising certificate to lapse, he is no longer a practising barrister, however, any barrister can be subject to disciplinary processes by the Bar Standards Board & if a KC is considered to have brought the profession into disrepute it is slightly easier to revoke a KC than a peerage. The Bar Council won't act without complaints though.

On MPs, lying to the public about the outcome of a legal case, as Osborne & others have done, seems to me a clear breach of the Nolan Principles (Code of Conduct Section C here; https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm5803/cmcode/1083/1083.pdf) so complaints should be addressed to both the Leader of the relevant Party & to the Parliamentary Commission for Standards. There is, I suppose, an element of letting them get away with it if we don't use those complaint systems that do exist. Time to break out the green ink!

Slightly older. I am a woman. No, not initially. I was a registered with a paediatric clinic, but my initial HRT was sourced outside the clinic.

I've never taken a puberty blocker. My puberty was late likely due to anorexia.

I never received HRT through my paediatrician. Though, eventually my new GP did accept the responsibility of monitoring my blood tests.

14 year olds can be prescribed HRT in many countries.

We stopped using oestrogens to treat prostate cancer decades ago because of the extensive and life-threatening side effects.

and also the non life-threatening side effects. Men just don't like being feminised.

Has Jolyon ever answered this question?

I'm not on Twitter/X - have GG or WI made any response to this?

We still use androgen blockers; just not oestrogens. Men don't like dying, either.

@potpourree If you don't want a TwiX account you can use Nitter.net & see whatever's been posted.

yes, of course. I never said blockers didn't have uses.

It is probably better described as ‘supplementing’ exogenous hormones because there is no way that the doses of estrogen is ‘replacing’ male levels of estrogen. It is artificially raising estrogen levels to exceed the naturally produced range healthy male people produce.

The labelling of these supplements as ‘replacement’ is very misleading and seems to only be so to copy the HRT terminology used for female people when needed, particularly in menopause. Which by the way, you have in the past used for your reduction of artificially high exogenous estrogen supplements which has in turn been pointed out as not being anything like menopause.

Just like your puberty, with both testosterone (unsurpressed) and artificially raised estrogen together, that confidently informed us was a ‘female puberty’ when this is impossible

Liar.

As we've traded words on this before, I will say my experience of my puberty is my experience. That I and some women believe parts of that experience overlap is my understanding. You are free to believe everything you wish to believe, but in so far as you've already presumed my HRT consists of only oestrogen, your beliefs are already wrong.

On progesterone as well, are you? For your boobs?

That, also, is not HRT. It's not "replacing" anything. It's increasing your naturally lower male levels.

And so, if you are replacing testosterone, that is indeed HRT.

Any treatment of exogenous hormones that are above the natural male level of that hormone is not ‘replacement’ as such. It is a supplement or a treatment. But not a replacement.

And no… your puberty was never a ‘female puberty’ that you called it. That is you claiming to have a female body process that is simply impossible. Just like you simply can never have ‘female’ breasts.

No matter how many times you tell people it is just their ‘belief’, it is not a belief. It is established and proven medical science. If you don’t understand the science, that is fine but please stop claiming that you have female body parts and female body processes. While it might make you feel better to describe them that way, it is factually impossible. And no… that is not a ‘belief’ and no, your experience is irrelevant because it is based on your belief which is not based on established evidence.

Otherwise, please link up that evidence.

As has been said before, if any medical clinician describes any of your body processes as being ‘female’ or using female body terminology, they are misinforming you and they should never do that.

Calling an understanding of proven science ‘belief’ while declaring your ‘experience’ of an impossibility is factual is what is ‘belief’.

It is gaslighting women to declare that any male person goes through female body processes when that is impossible due to never having a female reproductive system.

This page on their website has information that's plain wrong:

https://bateswells.co.uk/updates/the-for-women-scotland-judgment-what-do-charities-need-to-know/