Meet the Other Phone. Flexible and made to last.

Meet the Other Phone.
Flexible and made to last.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Feminism: Sex and gender discussions
Thread gallery
5
tropicaltrance · 16/02/2026 20:33

"Transgender patients are patients."

She just loves her incantations, doesn't she.

MrsOvertonsWindow · 16/02/2026 20:42

LightningMode · 16/02/2026 20:28

I counted four "charlatans". Webberley is clearly very butthurt, as the young folx say 😆

She described clinicians who provide gender-affirming care as “charlatans.”

She referred to clinicians providing gender-affirming care as “charlatans just handing out inappropriate drugs.”

She was given a national platform to repeat contested claims as fact, dismiss experienced clinicians as charlatans,

When she sits on the BBC and tells the nation that children have been “misled” and that gender-affirming clinicians are “charlatans,”

Webberley might be sore while the rest if us are thrilled Cass has said this.
We don't like the "extremist both sides" bit but in addition to the accurate descriptions of charlatan medics she pointed out that most children grow out of this, that social media is responsible for misleading children, that social transition can lock children into an unnatural trajectory and that the experimental surgery performed is brutal.

An absolutely damning assessment of how children have been harmed and abused by an activist led system.

LightningMode · 16/02/2026 20:48

See, I'm not as unhappy as other people are about the "both sides" bit. To me, it will give her conclusions a bit more weight with the general public.

RedToothBrush · 16/02/2026 21:07

LightningMode · 16/02/2026 16:25

All Webberley has done is write a letter. And tell everyone about it.

That does not equal the GMC actually starting an investigation.

Webberley is like the GLP - all mouth and no trousers. (Pun intended 😉)

trash shop GIF

The GMC will file the complaint in an appropriate place.

POWNewcastleEastWallsend · 16/02/2026 23:51

Children 'weaponised' by both sides of transgender debate - Dr Cass | Sunday with Laura Kuenssberg
15th Feb 2026 - BBC News (9.27 mins)

Video Description

Children have been "weaponised" by both sides of a toxic debate about transgender rights, the author of a government review into the treatment of children and young people questioning their gender has said.

Dr Hilary Cass told Sunday with Laura Kuenssberg "people at the extremes" had caused "quite a lot of distress for young people". She also suggested "unrealistic images and expectations on social media" had misled children, and that if some young people had "taken more time" they might not have pursued medical treatments.

Her 2024 review found gender medicine had been operating on "shaky foundations" when it came to evidence for medical treatment.

The review was commissioned after concerns about the treatment of growing numbers of children and young people with worries about their gender, particularly at the Tavistock Clinic in London.

Transcript

CASS: I think it should be rare um and particularly rare in prepubertal children. And I think the guidance does a good job in explaining that you have to be particularly careful about young children because if they socially transition too early um we think they can get locked onto a trajectory that may not have been the correct natural trajectory for them. So super caution with the very young children.

KUENSSBERG: So for kids at primary school, you would say are on the side of caution in in every case because if not, it could set them on a path that they might not otherwise have followed.

CASS: Yes. Back in the day, oh, in the 1970s when they first started having clinics for children with gender dysphoria and gender in congruence. They were mostly prepubertal boys who felt that they were girls and left to their own devices because we didn't have hormone treatments and internet and all the rest. then most of them grew out of it and became gay men. So you the the risk of getting a child very fixed in a certain way of being too early is that you are not allowing them to develop and and work it out.

KUENSSBERG: How do you assess how many children and young people have distress that might be resolved as they grow up compared to the number of children and young people for whom this is going to be a lifelong issue?

CASS: When the clinic started there were about 50 children a year in the UK and then by the time I started my review it had shot up to three and a half thousand a year and we tried very hard to find out from the TAVIStock what happened to the ones that didn't go on a medical pathway and they just didn't follow them up. We didn't have that data. So that's one chunk of children who don't go on a medical pathway and then there's all the ones that you know parents and teachers will tell you about who go through two or three years of gender questioning and then desist. So I think it's probably a really tiny number and as I said even amongst the traditional the traditional cohort of the the birth registered boys um who presented prepubertally most of them grew up to be gay men. So it's probably quite a tiny number who are going to grow up, but I can't give you figures.

KUENSSBERG: What do you think is behind that change, that huge ballooning of the numbers of kids and young people who feel this kind of distress?

CASS: I think it's complex. Um there's never going to be simple answers to this, but there's a whole series of different pressures on young people now. Plus, there's a different kind of cultural context where people are in some ways less locked into gender stereotypes, so they can feel more flexible about their about how they identify. And that's healthy. Um, but I think what has kind of misled children is the belief that if you are not a typical girl, if you like, you know, playing with trucks or, you know, boys who like dressing up, that that means or or that you have um same-sex attraction, that means that you're you're trans. And actually, it's not like that. That those are all normal variations. And I think children were being and young people were being given a narrative that it's not okay to be anything but absolutely typical of the other girls on Instagram.

KUENSSBERG: It's interesting you say misled, and you mentioned Instagram and social media. Do you think then there's a generation that have been misled by social media?

CASS: I think they I think they have had unrealistic images and expectations on social media. even, you know, a lack of realism about what transition would really mean and how hard it would be. Because for those young people who are going to grow up and never be comfortable in their body, um, a medical transition is the only way they're going to be able to live their life successfully and comfortably. But if that's not the path that you were intended to be on, it's a it's a huge cost to go through, you know, quite um quite intensive medical treatments and sometimes quite brutal surgeries um when actually if you'd taken more time that might not have been your pathway.

KUENSSBERG: There are though young people and some families who feel that you've made it harder for get for them to get the treatment that they desperately want that they desperately need.

CASS: Well, I think the the the new centres will be making sure that every single young person has individualised treatment and there are more centres. There are waiting lists but that that was the case before I did my review and we are seeing the waiting list going down. So I think the biggest hurdle at the moment is that they are still working through this this big backlog.

KUENSSBERG: When it comes though to the trial. So there is a plan at the moment. The intention is that there will be a trial of around 200 under 18s um being put on puberty blockers. There are clinicians in your field who feel that is the wrong thing to do. And in your report also you say for under 18s they shouldn't be given anything that's irrevocable that might be a kind of sliding doors moment for them in their life and then they can't go back the way. So how do you justify it?

CASS: Well, so we don't have any evidence at the moment that puberty blockers are irreversible. There's been a growing belief that that that's the case. There's no evidence at the moment that they cause irreversible changes. But these children who are on this trial will be about the most closely monitored you could imagine. People will be very carefully looking at all aspects their cognitive development their psychological development their bone development and any hint that there are any significant long-term risk they would come off they would come off the trial. So, so it's ex it's a very careful trial, but what's much more worrying is that it's the children outside the trial who are getting these drugs from unregulated and dangerous sources with no monitoring um and possibly, you know, for the wrong reasons.

KUENSSBERG: For you, is it vital it happens?

CASS: I yeah, I think it's really really important because otherwise if we never answer this question, we're we're going to have ongoing um uh charlatans just handing out inappropriate drugs.

KUENSSBERG: It has been, as you said, a very fraught debate both amongst medical professionals and politicians. Do you think kids were let down by all the all the shouting from the adults?

CASS: Yeah, absolutely. and and were also caught up in all the issues about single sex spaces and sports and and safe safe areas for women which were actually not to do with the children but they were somehow part of a a football within it and and so you know that's that's that's a real shame that children have been weaponized

KUENSSBERG: Weaponized?

CASS: Yeah I think so by some people by people at the extremes the vast number of people in the middle are silent. Um, but the it's the people at the extremes who really have, I think, caused quite a lot of distress for young people. You know, even as there's been, you know, rhetoric in the press. It's frightening for young people.

KUENSSBERG: What do you mean by people at the extremes? Do you mean campaign groups or activists? Who do you mean?

CASS: So I think the people who have been activists on behalf of trans rights have actually in some ways been so strident that it's made it more difficult for trans people themselves who are just try quietly trying to live under the radar. Um and um and equally people who have taken a view that no one should ever transition have have similarly made it difficult and in a way I'm not really interested in the semantics of you know a trans women and that. There are a tiny number of people who will never be comfortable in their in their with their biological sex with the gender associated with their biological sex. And for them, a medical pathway is the only way they're going to live their life comfortably. And we don't understand why that is. But we have to try and help those people thrive as much as the young people who are going to grow out of this.

KUENSSBERG: You yourself came in for quite a lot of criticism by people on the extremes of both sides. At one point, you said you weren't even using public transport. Is that better now? How's it been? What kind of toll has it taken on you?

CASS: Well, that was just in the brief period immediately after the report came out. Um there's a there's a lot of noise on social media that you can just switch off as you know. And um the thing that really counterbalances it for me is that so many clinicians that I see when I go and talk at clinical conferences just come up to me and say, "Oh, thank you. so I can now just do the job I've been trained to do without being fearful of being called transphobic" or "Your report wasn't rocket science. It just makes good sense". And those comments from real people far outweigh the noise on social media.

KUENSSBERG: Dr. Cass, thanks so much indeed for coming and speak to us and having a calm and clear conversation about a very sensitive issue. Thanks so much.

CASS: Thank you.

SinnerBoy · 17/02/2026 01:24

Ian Brady Reports Boy For Stealing Kit Kat in Fourboys

TiredoftheRhetoric · 17/02/2026 11:11

Just an FYI, puberty blockers have been prescribed for precocious puberty in males and females for decades with very little mention of 'irreversible damage'. Why is it that people feel it necessary to stop puberty from happening when a young person may not be 'ready' for puberty, but feel it's against nature when a young person may feel that going through puberty at all will be detrimental to their health and wellbeing?
Dr Webberley is right in referring Dr Cass to the GMC as she does not share the whole story and very much pushes a rhetoric against it.

OpheliaWitchoftheWoods · 17/02/2026 11:22

From experience with a number of family friends - I've only known paediatricians prescribe it when a child already had significant medical and additional needs and disabilities, it's been for a very short period, it is not without side effects, and it is meant to prevent something happening at the wrong point in development, not to prevent it taking place at all. It is not sold as a 'pause button', it will not be in aim to prevent the child's puberty occuring at all as they age through the time when puberty should happen with impact on brain and body development, and will not lead in a direct pathway to sex change hormones leading to sterilisation and/or highly invasive surgeries on a healthy body, and/or becoming a lifelong chronic patient.

In fact even where children with severe global disabilities are finding periods difficult and painful, and with all the associated risks of abuse that come from being non verbal and severely disabled in female anatomy, paediatricians absolutely flatly refuse to consider sterilisation where parents have requested it, as a horrific thing to do to a child even with mitigating circumstances.

This is a bit like saying because someone with a severely damaged leg might need it amputated as a last resort, someone who wants their leg amputated because they're upset by it through body dysmorphia should not be denied the same experience. Children with severe mental health needs - the distress of facing adolescence - need support and treatment for that, not the application of physical medicine designed and meant for people with serious physical medical conditions.

CassOle · 17/02/2026 11:23

Tired, you must be late to the party. Concerns about using 'puberty blockers' (GnRH antagonists) for various health conditions have been raised for years. Including for precocious puberty (see article below from 2017), endometriosis, and prostate cancer.

I also find it unbelievable that you really can't see the difference between temporarily using GnRH antagonists for a child going into puberty well before the normal window/timeframe, and then stopping the GnRH antagonists once they reach that window. Compared to a child with no physical health issues going into puberty during the correct window and then (usually) keeping them on the drugs for a much longer timeframe and then putting them on cross-sex hormones.

https://www.pbs.org/newshour/health/women-fear-drug-they-used-to-halt-puberty-led-to-health-problems

Women fear drug they used to halt puberty led to health problems

Despite questions about Lupron’s lasting side effects and minimal study into its safety, the FDA sped approval of the drug to market.

https://www.pbs.org/newshour/health/women-fear-drug-they-used-to-halt-puberty-led-to-health-problems

CassOle · 17/02/2026 11:27

Drug companies want a market for their wares. They tried very hard to push the idea of giving severely disabled children GnRH antagonists to keep them in a childlike state to make it easy to care for them, before switching to children with gender dysphoria. This was all discussed in a previous thread on the board.

The bottom line is - unsurprisingly, given what we know about OxyContin - money.

MarieDeGournay · 17/02/2026 11:28

TiredoftheRhetoric · 17/02/2026 11:11

Just an FYI, puberty blockers have been prescribed for precocious puberty in males and females for decades with very little mention of 'irreversible damage'. Why is it that people feel it necessary to stop puberty from happening when a young person may not be 'ready' for puberty, but feel it's against nature when a young person may feel that going through puberty at all will be detrimental to their health and wellbeing?
Dr Webberley is right in referring Dr Cass to the GMC as she does not share the whole story and very much pushes a rhetoric against it.

That's what PBs are for - delaying puberty happening to very young children for whom it would be traumatic - imagine having periods when you're 6 or 7...
But when they reach the normal age for puberty they can come off the PBs, and go through puberty.

Any side-effects of the PBs used in the way they were intended are [a] proportionate to what they are treating and [b] of short duration as the child does not remain on them for longer than necessary.

Can you genuinely not see the difference? Really, truly, genuinely not see the difference? I find that unlikely, but who knows?

MassiveWordSalad · 17/02/2026 11:33

This is just another phase of Webberley’s marketing strategy, surely? She must know nothing will come of it, but she keeps her name out there and might appease some of the folx she has pissed off.

CassOle · 17/02/2026 11:33

It is unbelievable.

See also the stupid 'they are given to Cis children and not Trans children' argument. Has anyone actually done any research on the gender identity of children with precocious puberty?

I know it's all bollocks, but if the question hasn't been asked, how can the gender identity believers assert in good faith that every child with precocious puberty is 'cis'?

Oh, that's right - it's all bad faith lies and obfuscation.

OldCrone · 17/02/2026 11:34

TiredoftheRhetoric · 17/02/2026 11:11

Just an FYI, puberty blockers have been prescribed for precocious puberty in males and females for decades with very little mention of 'irreversible damage'. Why is it that people feel it necessary to stop puberty from happening when a young person may not be 'ready' for puberty, but feel it's against nature when a young person may feel that going through puberty at all will be detrimental to their health and wellbeing?
Dr Webberley is right in referring Dr Cass to the GMC as she does not share the whole story and very much pushes a rhetoric against it.

First of all, there is evidence that children given these drugs for precocious puberty have been damaged by them.

Lupron, used to halt puberty in children, may cause lasting health problems

Why is it that people feel it necessary to stop puberty from happening when a young person may not be 'ready' for puberty

The normal minimum age for puberty to start is 8 in girls and 9 in boys. The children with precocious puberty who are 'not ready' for puberty are younger than this. It's not just that they are not 'ready' for puberty at younger ages, although obviously they aren't, but that a child stops growing after puberty, so these children would end up as extremely short adults if their puberty wasn't delayed. This is a medical condition which requires medical intervention.

but feel it's against nature when a young person may feel that going through puberty at all will be detrimental to their health and wellbeing?

A young person 'feeling' that going through puberty at all will be detrimental to their health and wellbeing doesn't have a medical condition which requires medical intervention. At least not this sort of medical intervention. They may need psychological treatment to deal with their feelings, but they don't need to be given powerful drugs which affect their hormones and have harmful side effects.

Edited for typos.

Drug used to halt puberty in children may cause lasting health problems

A number of women attribute their chronic health problems — including brittle bones and faulty joints — to use of Lupron while they were children.

https://www.statnews.com/2017/02/02/lupron-puberty-children-health-problems/

CassOle · 17/02/2026 11:34

MassiveWordSalad · 17/02/2026 11:33

This is just another phase of Webberley’s marketing strategy, surely? She must know nothing will come of it, but she keeps her name out there and might appease some of the folx she has pissed off.

Yep, back to money we go.

TiredoftheRhetoric · 17/02/2026 11:34

MarieDeGournay · 17/02/2026 11:28

That's what PBs are for - delaying puberty happening to very young children for whom it would be traumatic - imagine having periods when you're 6 or 7...
But when they reach the normal age for puberty they can come off the PBs, and go through puberty.

Any side-effects of the PBs used in the way they were intended are [a] proportionate to what they are treating and [b] of short duration as the child does not remain on them for longer than necessary.

Can you genuinely not see the difference? Really, truly, genuinely not see the difference? I find that unlikely, but who knows?

Do you truly think that when they're prescribed for young people who are going through gender dysphoria that they're only used for the duration that they're needed? For example, if a young person starts a puberty blocker at 12 years old it might be between 2-6 years for the duration of the puberty blocker...wouldn't you say that's exactly the same for a 6-8 year old going through precocious puberty?

CassOle · 17/02/2026 11:35

TiredoftheRhetoric · 17/02/2026 11:34

Do you truly think that when they're prescribed for young people who are going through gender dysphoria that they're only used for the duration that they're needed? For example, if a young person starts a puberty blocker at 12 years old it might be between 2-6 years for the duration of the puberty blocker...wouldn't you say that's exactly the same for a 6-8 year old going through precocious puberty?

Have you read 'Time to Think' by Hannah Barnes?

TiredoftheRhetoric · 17/02/2026 11:36

OldCrone · 17/02/2026 11:34

First of all, there is evidence that children given these drugs for precocious puberty have been damaged by them.

Lupron, used to halt puberty in children, may cause lasting health problems

Why is it that people feel it necessary to stop puberty from happening when a young person may not be 'ready' for puberty

The normal minimum age for puberty to start is 8 in girls and 9 in boys. The children with precocious puberty who are 'not ready' for puberty are younger than this. It's not just that they are not 'ready' for puberty at younger ages, although obviously they aren't, but that a child stops growing after puberty, so these children would end up as extremely short adults if their puberty wasn't delayed. This is a medical condition which requires medical intervention.

but feel it's against nature when a young person may feel that going through puberty at all will be detrimental to their health and wellbeing?

A young person 'feeling' that going through puberty at all will be detrimental to their health and wellbeing doesn't have a medical condition which requires medical intervention. At least not this sort of medical intervention. They may need psychological treatment to deal with their feelings, but they don't need to be given powerful drugs which affect their hormones and have harmful side effects.

Edited for typos.

Edited

So if there IS evidence, why haven't they also been stopped for precocious puberty? Who are we to say when a person should be going through puberty, isn't that a 'biological' outcome?

CassOle · 17/02/2026 11:41

Interfering with the body's natural development in a perfectly healthy person is wrong.

It is that simple.

Only people with moral failings or a dark triad personality would not understand that. Medicine must 'first do no harm'.

We don't need ethics and safeguarding so degraded that terrible medical experiments on living humans are accepted. That way lies Tuskegee, Unit 731 and Menglele.

AnSolas · 17/02/2026 11:44

TiredoftheRhetoric · 17/02/2026 11:11

Just an FYI, puberty blockers have been prescribed for precocious puberty in males and females for decades with very little mention of 'irreversible damage'. Why is it that people feel it necessary to stop puberty from happening when a young person may not be 'ready' for puberty, but feel it's against nature when a young person may feel that going through puberty at all will be detrimental to their health and wellbeing?
Dr Webberley is right in referring Dr Cass to the GMC as she does not share the whole story and very much pushes a rhetoric against it.

You are a bit undereducated.

Delaying not stopping puberty in a very young child is what the drugs were first used for.

There was never an aim to prevent natural maturation indefinitaly.

The use and misuse of the drugs have resulted in known negitive side effects.

Removing testosteone is known to have a negitive impact on bone density for both men and women.

Any doctor playing god and using a child as a guinnipig cashcow when they have not even bothered to spend the time to get specialist training may not be the best person hold out as a good authority when discussing using off lable drugs.

OldCrone · 17/02/2026 11:44

TiredoftheRhetoric · 17/02/2026 11:36

So if there IS evidence, why haven't they also been stopped for precocious puberty? Who are we to say when a person should be going through puberty, isn't that a 'biological' outcome?

They haven't been stopped because despite the side effects, there is a balance between the medical need to delay puberty and the potential side effects.

'We' don't decide when a person should go through puberty. It's a biological process which has a 'normal' age (later than 16 is also abnormal).

TiredoftheRhetoric · 17/02/2026 11:48

CassOle · 17/02/2026 11:33

It is unbelievable.

See also the stupid 'they are given to Cis children and not Trans children' argument. Has anyone actually done any research on the gender identity of children with precocious puberty?

I know it's all bollocks, but if the question hasn't been asked, how can the gender identity believers assert in good faith that every child with precocious puberty is 'cis'?

Oh, that's right - it's all bad faith lies and obfuscation.

I agree, the question should be asked and I don't think every child that goes through precocious puberty is Cis.

I have another question to pose though, are you against gender affirming care for everyone or just young people?

borntobequiet · 17/02/2026 11:48

TiredoftheRhetoric · 17/02/2026 11:11

Just an FYI, puberty blockers have been prescribed for precocious puberty in males and females for decades with very little mention of 'irreversible damage'. Why is it that people feel it necessary to stop puberty from happening when a young person may not be 'ready' for puberty, but feel it's against nature when a young person may feel that going through puberty at all will be detrimental to their health and wellbeing?
Dr Webberley is right in referring Dr Cass to the GMC as she does not share the whole story and very much pushes a rhetoric against it.

Gosh, aren’t you the well-informed one.

Except, of course, you have absolutely no idea of what puberty is or what it does.

TiredoftheRhetoric · 17/02/2026 11:50

OldCrone · 17/02/2026 11:44

They haven't been stopped because despite the side effects, there is a balance between the medical need to delay puberty and the potential side effects.

'We' don't decide when a person should go through puberty. It's a biological process which has a 'normal' age (later than 16 is also abnormal).

And you've just answered in favour of PBs for those with gender dysphoria as well as those with precocious puberty - "despite the side effects, there is a balance between the medical need to delay puberty and the potential side effects."

MarieDeGournay · 17/02/2026 11:50

TiredoftheRhetoric · 17/02/2026 11:34

Do you truly think that when they're prescribed for young people who are going through gender dysphoria that they're only used for the duration that they're needed? For example, if a young person starts a puberty blocker at 12 years old it might be between 2-6 years for the duration of the puberty blocker...wouldn't you say that's exactly the same for a 6-8 year old going through precocious puberty?

There's always a balance between the benefits of a treatment and its possible side-effects.

The possible side effects of PBs may be considered proportionate to stop a toddler going through puberty, but it is disproportionate to use them in an unapproved, off-label manner to treat gender incongruence which young people usually just grow out of.

So I wouldn't say it's 'exactly the same' - the context and intention of the use of PBs are completely different.

Swipe left for the next trending thread