The Cass Review reader: investigations into the treatment of gender dysphoric children and youth

144 comments on “The Cass Review reader: investigations into the treatment of gender dysphoric children and youth ”

• Comments are now closed

1. Anker 1

   15 April 2024 at 10:11 am

   Execellent article. Thanks so much Weka. Very comprehensive.

   This is a watershed moment in the fight against the imposition of gender ideology in medicine. It is a scandal!

   This article is about the shut down of dissenting clinicians who had concerns about giving these drugs to troubled children and adolescence.

   https://www.theguardian.com/society/2024/apr/12/this-isnt-how-good-scientific-debate-happens-academics-on-culture-of-fear-in-gender-medicine-research

   Thanks to the Standard for being one of the few platforms in NZ that didn't shut down debate
   • Leighton 1.1

     15 April 2024 at 10:38 am

     I second Anker's thanks to The Standard.
   • Molly 1.2

     15 April 2024 at 10:55 am

     I agree with you Anker.

     Thanks weka for providing such a clear outline of what needs to be discussed, which can act as a primer for those who want to know more.
   • Tabletennis 1.3

     15 April 2024 at 5:49 pm

     I agree with Anker too. Heaps of reading material …

     Thanks to Weka and The Standard in its efforts to the why and what is the so called "affirmation model" promoted to children and young adults.
   • lprent 1.4

     15 April 2024 at 8:08 pm

     We don't "shut it down". But I sure as hell disagree with virtually all of you who are so damn concerned about this minor issue. Frankly I can't see what so many are so concerned about the genitalia and hormones of others. It is almost pornographic to observe.

     Fundamentally I can't see what difference this report makes. But to me the entire 'debate' on this just reeks of bigots trying to tell other people how to live their life. For no apparent reason apart from a desire to meddle in the lives of others for no obvious or apparent reason apart from some kind of moral indignation that other make different choices to the ones that they would take themselves.

     It is akin to having adults telling teenagers that they shouldn't be able to deface themselves by poking poke holes into themselves to insert jewellery. Why exactly? In the end there is a damn high probability that they will do it anyway.

     Or another one that comes up often through history is that people under the age of X shouldn't be able to get tattoos just in case they change their mind in later life. FFS: it is their damn choice to make. It is also their choice to take the risk of regret.

     Basically this is just feels like another instance of a witchfinder or Mrs Grundy trying to tell people how to live their lives and how they should all be as they'd prefer. I really just despise meddlers who think like that. The whisperers in corners talking about others and ultimately throwing then on pyres for imagined offences against 'nature'.

     I'd get interested if there were evident instances of coercion in forcing others to do these procedures. But reading though this morass of commentary of data I can't see any mention of that actually happening.

     What I see is that people frequently having regret about their own choices. Some from not getting the emotional or bodily effect that they felt they should have gotten. Some at suffering the short end of the risks of the procedures that they decided to take.

     How exactly is this different from something like plastic surgery. Or body building. Or steroid misuse. PTSD from voluntarily being in a dangerous profession like military, firefighting or whatever. Or deciding to try addictive drugs..

     There are whole TV shows or docos about regrets from some of those.

     What I do see in the commentary is some self-righteous arseholes wanting to restrict the choices of others without even proffering reason why they should be sticking the nosy beaks into the debate as they demonise other for their choices. What exactly is their interest. What motivates it. And why in the hell do they care at all? It has been noticeable that few of the most enthused at pillorying gendered fluid have ever bothered to explain why they find them so terrifying. Instead, they endlessly pull up singleton examples of arseholes who happen to be gender fluid across the world, usually the same ones over and over again to express their terror.

     Let me make this absolutely clear. I don't know of a single person who hasn't subsequently regretted some of the choices that they have made in their life. I know that I do, both when I was a teenager and for many other decisions I made in later life.

     But in the end there are only a few reasons why society should get involved in the personal decisions that people make. Most of them are related to harm to others like assault/rape/theft/etc and are individual criminal acts, and some related to harm to society – like destroying common property/fraud/inciting riots/hooking people on addictive drugs for profit/etc.

     I can't see any of this in what has been described. I can just see the shadow of people like witchfinders, Mrs Grundy and other idiots who want to remove the ability of people to make their own informed decisions. Who cares about people cross-dressing

     So far few of the indignant advocates for this particular variation of prohibition have been even remotely convincing. Like prohibition, it appears to be a meaningless gesture. If thinking people want to do something and it doesn't impact significantly on others or on the whole of society – then I can't see a reason to drive it underground. I simply can't see a victim in all of this kerfuffle about gender.

     What I see is another stupid debate about toilet gender – where almost all of the pathetic indignation was about a problem that did not exist. Toilet are regulated by densities of people – not gender. Choices about having gendered toilets are made by the owners of facilities fro what they perceive are the wishes of their clientele – not by legislation or prohibition. If you want to change

     I'll go and have a look at the detail of Cass report at some point. But from what has been said, it just looks like a scientific study on efficacy of treatments (which require control populations to determine significance). It looks like the studies it was looking at are too few or of too poor a quality to actually draw too many conclusions. It also doesn't appear to have been particularly assiduous at looking at the reverse cases (again required by double blind) by looking at consequences on non-treatment.

     Which is always going to a be a weak point because as someone said in the Wikipedia article..

     Portia Predny, Vice President of the Australian Professional Association for Transgender Health, also disputed Cass’ conclusion that the evidence base for gender affirming care was weak, saying that the standard of evidence requested (randomized control trials) was neither feasible nor ethical to achieve.[36]

     You can't give treatments to those who don't want them. It is unethical. You cannot deny treatments to those who do need them as that is also not ethical. That means it is near impossible statistically hard to build a case for either way.

     That really means that to decide if there is a actual problem, the best approach is probably to do what is happening now. Let people make their own decisions about themselves based on the information present at the time, then study it longitudinally.

     I should really tidy this comment up and post it to the top of the site…
     • Robert Guyton 1.4.1

       15 April 2024 at 8:34 pm

       sighs (in a good way)
     • Molly 1.4.2

       15 April 2024 at 8:35 pm

       Your long reply misrepresents (or misunderstands) concern raised, while simultaneously showing a decided lack of knowledge.

       Many who raise concerns are accepting of non-conformity in presentation or personality. They are concerned about significant iatrogenic harm from unnecessary medical interventions.

       You mention tattoos.

       What tattoos are paid for by the Ministry of Health? Are tattoos associated with decreased bone density, a drop in IQ, loss of libido, connected to a delay or interruption in emotional and psychological maturity? Do those tattoos lead onto more significant body modifications – again paid for by the Ministry of Health – that will reduce or remove fertility, reduce or stop sexual function and enjoyment, and increase the chances of many significant diseases – kidney disease, MS etc. At this point – do the Ministry of Health commit to funding the re-inking of your tattoo until death, as that will be a requirement.

       Let's just agree, your comparator was both trivial and poor.

       If this is what you call "bigots trying to tell other people how to live their life." then you have very little understanding of what those "bigots" are concerned about, and why they are concerned.

       "I'll go and have a look at the detail of Cass report at some point. "

       Yes. It is apparent you are riding on reckons in this rant. A bit of reading might do some good.

       Are you able to provide any other example of a state of being that is not considered a pathology but DEMANDS and receives significant, expensive and ongoing medical interventions on demand from our health system?

       Did you consider that those who witnessed the harm from other ill-evidenced treatments, might be wanting to avoid the same level of harms being visited on those children most vulnerable to this response?

       (As for the benefit of single-sex spaces for females – I'll leave that for now. The issue of iatrogenic harm to children is the topic of the day, and you have a mountain of evidence to catch up on.)
       • lprent 1.4.2.1

         16 April 2024 at 9:24 am

         What tattoos are paid for by the Ministry of Health?

         I deliberately picked a range of examples that are based on choice specifically for your benefit.

         I notice you cherry picked only one example to respond to and ignored all of the others. Kind of hypocritical of you don't you think?

         For instance so why shouldn't this be like plastic surgery which I also raised as a matter of personal choice. Mostly done in the private sector outside of reconstructive surgery. I suspect that in your view that also shouldn't be done.

         Perhaps you'd like to look at that as the basis of your defence of your views.

         Did you consider that those who witnessed the harm from other ill-evidenced treatments, might be wanting to avoid the same level of harms being visited on those children most vulnerable to this response?

         Sure, and exactly how does that give you the right to right to impose your views on it on others. Inform if you wish. But to advocate for a prohibition as you seem to be doing is just ridiculous.

         "I'll go and have a look at the detail of Cass report at some point. "

         Yes. It is apparent you are riding on reckons in this rant. A bit of reading might do some good.

         Have you read the actual report? Do you you understand the statistical arguments. The statistical reasons to exclude or include studies?

         That level of understanding is not apparent in your comments. What I can see from your writing on it is that you are relying on the interpretations and opinions of others. I simply can't see a high degree of understanding evident in your commentary. I suspect you are simply being implicitly dishonest in that statement as well because you are holding someone else to standard that you'd fail yourself.
         • Molly 1.4.2.1.1

           16 April 2024 at 9:49 am

           "For instance so why shouldn't this be like plastic surgery which I also raised as a matter of personal choice. Mostly done in the private sector outside of reconstructive surgery."

           Plastic surgery – when it relates to cosmetic surgery – is another poor comparator. The Ministry of Health does not fund or provide this on demand. ACC would be unwilling to fund revision procedures or required medications arising from unintended or unwanted outcomes from plastic surgery.

           "I suspect that in your view that also shouldn't be done."

           Suspicion unfounded. Unless you were talking about cosmetic surgery for children, in which case I would expect there to be quite high restrictions, mostly reliant on whether there is an underlying condition or not – eg. cleft palate.

           "Have you read the actual report? Do you you understand the statistical arguments. The statistical reasons to exclude or include studies?

           That level of understanding is not apparent in your comments. What I can see from your writing on it is that you are relying on the interpretations and opinions of others. "

           Oh, Hello Pot.

           No, I haven't yet read the full report (just a visit to the website) – as I have to get down to Warehouse Stationery to print it out – hardcopies being my preference. I actually have issues with some of what I have read, but they are trivial compared to the iatrogenic harm currently happening to children.

           I HAVE, however, read many of the documents relating to WPATH SoC – both 7 and 8, The Endocrinology Society, the AAAP which form the basis for gender affirmative care. I have read the DSM-5 articles relating to the diagnosis. I have read the studies produced by the likes of Jack Turban et al, and the systematic reviews produced by Sweden. Occasionally, I read a random study from a list. I have also listened to the testimonies of clinicians, researchers, whistleblowers and patients from gender clinics. I have also had the edifying experience of being on a hormone blocker for several years now, and have spoken with others on the same medication about the significant impacts this has on their lives, function and well-being.

           I have taken every opportunity to stay informed over the last few years, and did not require the Cass report to support my current position which is based on acquired knowledge.

           "I simply can't see a high degree of understanding evident in your commentary. I suspect you are simply being implicitly dishonest in that statement as well because you are holding someone else to standard that you'd fail yourself."

           I honestly don't care about your opinion of me, and am not writing my comment as a thesis for you. In fact, due to experience on this site, and observation of your exchanges – I would consider it a waste of time – so I challenge your comparators in the same patient way I would with a novice whose knowledge is limited, and so they approach it with glib comparators and misunderstandings. It's a initial untangling of the ball of ignorance, rather than knitting the full jumper – if you get my drift.

           Besides, people – including myself – have provided numerous links in this thread, and over the years for those whose interest is peaked to get started. Everyone has their own method of investigation and research. I suggest you do what you keep saying – I'll go and have a look at the detail of Cass report at some point – and start playing catch up.

           At this point, I'm comfortable waiting, you've got a lot to do.
     • Anker 1.4.3

       15 April 2024 at 9:25 pm

       Molly has responded to you Lynn and I agree with all her points.

       Quoting Portia Predny from Apath shows how little you have read on this thread. I posted above about research from the University of York. The Cass Review got the University of York to conduct a rigorous evidenced based study of the various transgender healthcare guidelines across regions and countries. This research included the Australian guidelines as well as New Zealand. Their research found that out of 21 guidelines studied all bar two fell well below acceptable standards. The only two standards that were of an acceptable level were Sweden's and Finlands. So organisations like Apath and New Zealand's Patha have been completely discredited.
     • weka 1.4.4

       15 April 2024 at 9:27 pm

       That really means that to decide if there is a actual problem, the best approach is probably to do what is happening now. Let people make their own decisions about themselves based on the information present at the time, then study it longitudinally.

       Part of Cass's remit was to run research as part of the review. The team were supposed to gather data from the adult gender clinics of people that had transitioned as teens.

       So that the effectiveness of the model of care used in the past decade/s could be assessed.

       Because GIDS at Tavistock had failed to keep records or track the outcomes of its patients. That's one of the reasons why the government set up the review.

       Nearly all of adult gender clinics refused to co-operate with the review, and withheld data.

       The clinics have now been told to hand the data over. They are also now going to be formally reviewed.

       The NHS must reveal the fate of 9,000 transgender young people treated by the controversial Tavistock clinic, the Health Secretary has said in the wake of the Cass review.

       The landmark report published on Wednesday found adult gender clinics had refused to disclose whether transgender people who started their treatment as children later changed their minds about transitioning, or went on to suffer serious mental health problems.

       Victoria Atkins, the Health Secretary, met Amanda Pritchard, the chief executive of NHS England, on Wednesday to tell her “nothing less than full co-operation by those clinics in the research is acceptable”.

       …

       The review, led by Dr Hilary Cass, a paediatrician, said that the lack of “robust data” on what had happened to the 9,000 children who were treated by the gender clinic at the Tavistock between 2009 and 2020 was “unacceptable”.

       Those children then went on to continue their treatment at adult clinics.

       Research led by the University of York had been due to look at the long-term outcomes of children treated by the Tavistock.

       It was expected to provide insights into the clinic’s work, including the number of patients treated with puberty blockers and cross-sex hormones, how many people detransitioned and how many had a “co-occurring mental health diagnosis” or a “diagnosis of autistic spectrum disorder”. The review had been given the power to access medical records.

       Ms Atkins says: “It is disgraceful that adult gender clinics have not co-operated with the vital University of York research to link data on children at the Tavistock so that we can understand their journey into adulthood.

       https://archive.is/Sk03a#selection-2733.0-2749.207
       • lprent 1.4.4.1

         16 April 2024 at 9:11 am

         Ok. So that is a purely bureaucratic issue in another nation. Sloppy. Hardly earth shattering.

         However that has nothing to do with anything outside of the NHS. Here is just means that the reporting provisions for similar centres should be reviewed. Just as happens in areas like oncology, pharmac, etc etc

         It has absolutely nothing much to do with

         Cass also raises concern about the impact of puberty blockers in developmental and long term health, including brain function and bone density. The key takeaway here is the lack of solid medical research to support use for gender dysphoric children.

         The other side of that is nothing in the review about saying that there isn't a need to provide services that have been provided by the GIDS. In fact there is a recommendation that they continue.

         You wouldn't know that is the case from many of the comments here or offshore. What I see is a whole pile of people trying to play god over the choices of others and doing it in a total reprehensible way with distortions of "what this review means".

         And that is before I get time to have a peek into the actual report.
         • weka 1.4.4.1.1

           16 April 2024 at 9:55 am

           one of the great things about the CR is that it is centred around the health needs of gender dysphoric children. The debate is polarised, but she treads a very good middle ground without losing sight of the child safeguarding issues.

           Yes, she is talking about the need for continued provision of services. Of course 🤷‍♀️ She talked about it in the interim review as well, including when GIDS was being closed. It's been a key part of the whole thing.

           It's mentioned in the post, where I quote the piece about holistic services. What that means is stopping using the affirmation only model that says children must be affirmed in the gender they profess and treatments follow that and only that, and instead do all the things that used to be considered standard for distressed children and youth: mental health assessments, taking into account abuse histories, checking of undiagnosed autism and considering that many kids will grow out of their gender ID and settle into being lesbian and gay instead.

           All of that has been discussed for a long time in many countries, including NZ. The reason not many people know about the issues is because No Debate has suppressed public discussion. We don't have good reporting on this in NZ.

           One of the reasons I am writing these posts is to present the resources that people can use to inform themselves without having to wade through all the polarised fights. And secondarily, to provide a space on TS that will allow people to work through the issues without the vitriol and evidence free reckons that is happening elsewhere.
         • Molly 1.4.4.1.2

           16 April 2024 at 10:18 am

           lprent, apologies for the previous comment, which weka quite rightly moved to Open Mike.

           Here are some of the studies I've read recently – am currently going through my Bookmarks for another reason – that form SOME of the basis for my position and current understanding:

           Development of Gender Non-Contentedness During Adolescence and Early Adulthood – February 2024: https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10508-024-02817-5

           Reduction in Mental Health Treatment Utilization Among Transgender Individuals After Gender-Affirming Surgeries: A Total Population Study: 2019 https://ajp.psychiatryonline.org/doi/10.1176/appi.ajp.2019.19010080

           The follow-up to the above 2020 https://segm.org/ajp_correction_2020

           I'll leave it there, because I don't want the number of links to trigger off moderation, although I have many more. From those that support my current understanding, and also from those that advocate for affirmation only care – including not just acceptance of self-diagnosis, but immediate and significant medical and surgical treatment.
         • weka 1.4.4.1.3

           16 April 2024 at 10:35 am

           Ok. So that is a purely bureaucratic issue in another nation. Sloppy. Hardly earth shattering.

           Well, no. The point here is why the adult gender clinics refused to share the data. It's an ideological issue and not a bureaucratic one. And it applies in NZ as well, where clinicians are afraid to speak out because of fear for their jobs and careers.
     • Anker 1.4.5

       15 April 2024 at 9:33 pm

       The studies the Cass report looked at Lynn was extensive, but the quality of the studies was poor. These drugs have been prescribed to children off label.The evidence isn’t there. That's why Cass (a senior Paediatrian) concluded that the evidence to support the benefits of puberty blockers was weak and the risks, including long term ones were uncertain. That is why they have been banned in the UK for under 18 year old. Because there has been no adequate research conducted on these drugs for gender dysphoric youth. In other words there use has been experiemental. They have been experimenting on children. Tell me you think that is o.k.?

       Cass has recommended that puberty blockers should only be prescribed to people under the age of 18 as part of a rigourousresearch study which needs high levels of ethical consent which the design is likely RCT.
       • lprent 1.4.5.1

         16 April 2024 at 9:01 am

         The studies were poor for both views.

         From what I see in the studies is that there isn't evidence one way or another. Finding that some people have regret about their decisions simply isn't unexpected and is their choice if they are informed about the risks.

         What I don't see is much evidence that any of the procedures are inherently life-threatening or cause harm to society.

         So why exactly do you want to take informed choices away from people who are willing to take the risks for themselves.

         A wish to arbitrarily interfere in other peoples lives? Explain who made you the arbiter for other peoples choices.
         • weka 1.4.5.1.1

           16 April 2024 at 10:33 am

           The more pertinent question is why are people saying 12 year olds can't give informed consent to puberty blockers.

           Following from that, why it took whistleblowers at Tavistock and ex-patients going to court to be able to even get the question looked at seriously.

           What I don't see is much evidence that any of the procedures are inherently life-threatening or cause harm to society.

           This is why the Cass Review happened. Puberty blockers are now banned for that use because they were being used off label by clinicians in organisations that didn't keep adequate records and who blocked investigation multiple times and where many people were afraid to raise concerns.

           Pro-transition GOs and clinicians and the NZ MoH all said that PBs were safe and fully reversible. There was no evidence that that was true. Last year the MoH removed the "safe and fully reversible" phrase from its website after members of the public and child safeguarding orgs asked questions and did OIA requests.

           The BMJ quoted in the post said,

           One emerging criticism of the Cass review is that it set the methodological bar too high for research to be included in its analysis and discarded too many studies on the basis of quality. In fact, the reality is different: studies in gender medicine fall woefully short in terms of methodological rigour; the methodological bar for gender medicine studies was set too low, generating research findings that are therefore hard to interpret. The methodological quality of research matters because a drug efficacy study in humans with an inappropriate or no control group is a potential breach of research ethics. Offering treatments without an adequate understanding of benefits and harms is unethical. All of this matters even more when the treatments are not trivial; puberty blockers and hormone therapies are major, life altering interventions. Yet this inconclusive and unacceptable evidence base was used to inform influential clinical guidelines, such as those of the World Professional Association for Transgender Health (WPATH), which themselves were cascaded into the development of subsequent guidelines internationally (doi:10.1136/bmj.q794).7

           my bold and italics.

           It's unethical to be using drugs on children without clinical trials that support that use. It's unethical to continue to use those drugs on children when there are good reasons to be concerned about the impact of those drugs on brain development and bone density.

           You might not see the damage being done, but this is true of many people, and again, the is why the Cass Review was necessary.
           • weka 1.4.5.1.1.1

             16 April 2024 at 10:41 am

             correction, MoH changed their website in 2022

             https://thestandard.org.nz/the-cass-review-reader-investigations-into-the-treatment-of-gender-dysphoric-children-and-youth/#comment-1996760
         • Anker 1.4.5.1.2

           16 April 2024 at 1:36 pm

           Its very simple Lyn. Clinicians have a duty of care. Health treatment isn't like goods and services that consumers are free to purchase (and of course children don't have much power here either as their parents rightly supervise their purchases to some degree).

           I haven't made this decision. Dame Hilary Cass after a four year review of gender medicine has. She is a senior paedetrian. She got York Universtiy to undertake research under the most rigourous scientific conditions. Their research found that most advisory groups who set the standards of care, including Patha NZ are sub standard. This is a daming finding. They have completely lost credibility.

           You may be confused, thinking that I want to outlaw or ban men who want to present as women from doing so. This is incorrect. They are entitled to do so and I will do what I do with all people I meet, take them as I find them. But by wearing a dress or even having cosmetic surgery, they don't become women. That is scientifically impossible. And like all GC I will fight to ensure that women only spaces are maintained when sex matters.

           You do not seem to relize that the Cass review points to a medical scandal of significant.

           BTW it is highly debatable that children can give informed consent to these treatements cause their level of cognitive development. Adults can.
     • Psycho Milt 1.4.6

       16 April 2024 at 8:04 am

       Appalling medical misadventures that don't affect us are easily dismissed as a "minor issue." They're not so minor to the people who are affected by them.

       We aren't "concerned about the genitalia and hormones of others," we're concerned about alleged medical professionals messing with the genitalia and hormones of children based on no good evidence and in many cases causing permanent damage. The Cass report is damning and there's no reason to believe the situation in NZ is any better.
       • lprent 1.4.6.1

         16 April 2024 at 8:55 am

         The question is always about choice and informed choice.

         I can and did go into the army as a teenager. That was a choice that carried risk.

         I have family members that have had grommets for hearing issues. That carries medical risks.

         My problem is that I see a number of idiots trying to remove the informed choice to take risk from others. What I want to see is reasons why the state, idiot politicians, or a collection of indignant meddlers have to take decisions for others. So far I don't see any.

         Moreover I also can't see any need for society. If parents, teenagers, and adults choose to take informed risks about themselves or their children that have little or no consequences for others – I also can't see any reason to stop them.

         That is my issue with this. State why you have the right to remove choices from others. So far all I see is that you want to play god with other peoples genitals without their consent. Crimes act anyone..
         • Nic the NZer 1.4.6.1.1

           16 April 2024 at 9:04 am

           This argument is based on a false premise. Medical treatments (as opposed to cosmetic treatments) should and do have different standard for effectiveness and risk than other treatments.
           • Anker 1.4.6.1.1.1

             16 April 2024 at 1:38 pm

             100% Nic the NZer
         • Molly 1.4.6.1.2

           16 April 2024 at 9:26 am

           "The question is always about choice and informed choice."

           I can see that the issue needs to be broken down into ever smaller pieces for you. In this respect, the Cass Report – alongside the WPATH files – also reveals an issue with "misinformed consent".

           (Still awaiting your answer on what other non-pathology get significant and harmful state funded medical and surgical interventions?)

           "That is my issue with this. State why you have the right to remove choices from others. So far all I see is that you want to play god with other peoples genitals without their consent. Crimes act anyone.."

           I suggest you stop this attempt at redirection, you come across as a flailing idiot in search of an actual argument.
           • Shanreagh 1.4.6.1.2.1

             16 April 2024 at 11:03 am

             "That is my issue with this. State why you have the right to remove choices from others. So far all I see is that you want to play god with other peoples genitals without their consent. Crimes act anyone.."

             I suggest you stop this attempt at redirection, you come across as a flailing idiot in search of an actual argument.

             This argument that people concerned about lack of informed consent and lack of options are being concerned about 'genitals' you know 'dirty' etc is a deliberate strawman.

             Similar arguments, and the minimisation that goes with these arguments, were advanced several times by this poster on other what I call loosely women and children's issues.

             Would he have raised the same arguments around the discusion about the poor service offered to the women in the Unfortunate Experiment….you know focused on genitals and reproductive organs. 'Ick' Genitals and reproductive organs are parts of the human body. The discussion of experiments on them is no less concerning than any other part of the body.

             In fact rather than posters acting as god this has been the forte of those involved in the poor biased care being offered to children. Doctors and the like.

             I mentioned yesterday that some parents also have, in giving their consent to irreversible medical 'experiments' on their children, when commonsense & watchful waiting or treatement that did not involve irreverseability,may have suggested otherwise. Parents led by the nose to a service that presented two options only. Parents who in giving their consent for their minor children who were acting as God or 'in loco Deus' as I said.
         • Psycho Milt 1.4.6.1.3

           16 April 2024 at 10:17 am

           This isn't about removing people's right to choose anything, the Cass report is an evidence-based medicine review. It's effectively found serious problems with the "informed" part of informed consent and with standards of professional therapy and medical care, and that children and young adults are being harmed as a result.
     • Jan Rivers 1.4.7

       16 April 2024 at 10:02 pm

       There is a difference. These kids are being transitioned when they are children. they have no idea of the possible longterm costs such as infertility and lack of sexual function. They and their parents are told untreated they will commit suicide.

       I have met three young women who have detranstioned from being 'male'. Each regrets this and each bears the costs with courage. I have heard on a couple of occassions of other girls who in early adulthood are deeply depressed and won't leave their rooms because the shame of having made a wrong decision. Are the medics who gave them testosterone interested? Compassionate? When kids stop being glitter kids their peers bully them mercilessly and their doctors lose interest very quickly. I transcribed this from the video diary of a fourth young woman who provided her coming out story on Youtube. She had a trainee psychologist, an authority figure who put into her mind the idea that she was trans. She had never heard of it and thought it glamorous. And at the next appointment she told the psych that yes, she was transgender. She had a mastectomy at 18 after puberty blockers and cross sex hormones.

       I effectively went from being a little girl to a teenage boy pretty much overnight. It was the first 10 weeks of high school that I transitioned to male. It just blows my mind actually that I was allowed to do this. And I was endorsed to do this … by medical professionals. They were the ones who put this in my mind; told me this was possible; and supported me. They never gave me enough push back to say ‘are there other issues’? They knew I was going through therapy and I was very open about the fact that I had been the victim of domestic violence and abuse by men. And they knew that I had trauma about men being abusive towards women in my life and also me and my family. They knew that I had issues in my life. I was self-harming. I was depressed. I had so many issues and instead of trying to figure those out first they just slapped this label of trans on me and sent me off on my way to transtion. Looking back I do think that was abusive in a way – to send a child, a literal child, I was 13 years old I was barely a teenager. …. I had this idea put in my mind and I don’t blame myself. At the start of my detransition I blamed myself a lot. I felt stupid. I felt I did this to myself. But now I don’t. You know. I’ve heard a lot of stories of other detransitioned women like me – who felt that they were pressured by medical professionals to continue down this road. This is the fault of the system that we have at the moment with trans kids. I was experiencing gender dysphoria but it wasn’t because I was trans – it was because I felt safer in a male body. And I was vulnerable and I was hurting.
       • weka 1.4.7.1

         17 April 2024 at 8:28 am

         she sounds like an amazing young woman.
   • Chris Pook 1.5

     16 April 2024 at 6:51 pm

     Agreed, Anker. Thank you, Weka, and The Standard.
2. Leighton 2

   15 April 2024 at 10:55 am

   New Zealand, and particularly the Greens, need to square up to this. I supported the Greens for the best part of 20 years, my entire adult life, because I regarded them as the party of science and evidence-based policy. They aggressively abandoned those principles as soon as this became politically and ideologically convenient, throwing longtime members and supporters under the bus in doing so. Absent accountability and a thorough cleanout, I will not trust them again.
   • Molly 2.1

     15 April 2024 at 9:54 pm

     I alternated between Greens and Labour, and had a lot of respect for the older Green MPs. I'm very disillusioned with the current state of affairs, and will not support them with my vote.
3. Anker 3

   15 April 2024 at 11:07 am

   I posted this on Open Mike, rather than Wekas excellent article on the Cass report.

   I realize it may give shifted there, but this is information I wanted to draw to the attention of the wider Standard audience.

   Both Patha (the Professional Assn Transgender Healthcare Aotearoa) and Inside Out have come out against the Cass Review,This very thorough article responds to Patha's, IO criticisms and shows they are spinning misleading at best, lying at worse.

   https://www.speakupforwomen.nz/post/correcting-the-homework

   The Universtity of York conducted a comprehensive review of clinical guidelines available across a range of countries. They critiqued the guidelines based on a number of measures. Only two sets of guidelines met a high enough standard, Finland and Sweden. Patha can second to last. Patha are now completely discredited.

   https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/38594049/

   Ok, I am very sorry I am having trouble copying the link to York University, but will keep trying
4. Drowsy M. Kram 4

   15 April 2024 at 11:25 am

   https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cass_Review

   While not supporting every action of every trans rights activist, I would tend to count myself as an ally (observer status only) in many of their causes. My current views have much to do with my two (now young adult) niblings (both doing well), and my initial lack of support and understanding – notably a botched effort to deter the older nibling from venturing too early (for me) and too far along their unconventional gender identity path.

   Still think that, on balance, it's better to delay/withhold most/all irreversible interventions for as long as possible, but some youngsters seem to know their own minds, and can be quite determined – as it was, and ever will be.

   For interest, there has been some criticism of the Cass report – believe it or not.

   Hilary Cass’s proposals are mostly common sense. She must reject anti-trans bias with the same clarity
   [11 April 2024 – https://www.theguardian.com/profile/fred-mcconnell ]

   Dr Cass, appeasement might get you through this short-term discomfort in the media spotlight, but please remember: it isn’t your healthcare, your rights or your everyday dignity they are trying to take away.

   Hilary Cass' NHS report is rife with debunked theories and falsehoods [11 April 2024 – https://www.advocate.com/authors/erinreed ]

   Immediately after the release of the Cass Review, experts in transgender healthcare from around the world voiced their opposition to its findings. Dr. Portia Predny, Vice President of the Australian Professional Association for Trans Health, criticized the findings and recommendations as “at odds with the current evidence base, expert consensus, and the majority of clinical guidelines worldwide.” Similarly, a statement from the Professional Association for Transgender Health Aotearoa condemned the review, noting, “The Review commissioned several systematic reviews into gender-affirming care by the University of York, but appears to have ignored a significant number of studies demonstrating the benefits of gender-affirming care. In one review, 101 out of 103 studies were dismissed.”
   • Anker 4.1

     15 April 2024 at 1:18 pm

     Drowsy M Kram, thanks for your comments.

     Organisations such as Patha have now been completely discredited.

     https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/38594049/

     Sorry if you are having trouble with link. That could be my fault.

     The SUFW article goes through what Inside Out, Patha and Dame Sue Bagshall have said in response to the Cass review. It takes there statements and then using Cass's words from the review, shows that their arguements are untrue.
   • weka 4.2

     15 April 2024 at 1:21 pm

     Still think that, on balance, it's better to delay/withhold most/all irreversible interventions for as long as possible, but some youngsters seem to know their own minds, and can be quite determined – as it was, and ever will be.

     one of the truly great things about the CR is that it subverts the narrative that children should be allowed to make decisions independently and that everyone else has to support that (the affirmation only approach). She is squarely putting the responsibility back on the shoulders of the adults, especially medical professionals and policy makers.

     There is a very big difference between someone who is in their early teens knowing their own minds, and being able to make decisions at that age about becoming a lifelong medical patient with iatrogenic disability. Even more so when those teens are distressed via mental health, abuse, autism and living in a regressive, sexist and homophobic society. And even more so when they are deeply immersed in social media culture that is designed to manipulate them into social media culture.

     I am curious, did you read Ritchie, and Keira Bell's stories?
     • Drowsy M. Kram 4.2.1

       15 April 2024 at 2:41 pm

       I am curious, did you read Ritchie, and Keira Bell's stories?

       No – are they consistent with a belief that "on balance, it's better to delay/withhold most/all irreversible [gender-affirming] interventions for as long as possible"?

       https://theconversation.com/transgender-regret-research-challenges-narratives-about-gender-affirming-surgeries-220642

       https://www.aamc.org/news/states-are-banning-gender-affirming-care-minors-what-does-mean-patients-and-providers

       I'd prefer that "for as long as possible" not be extended to 'forever', but bans can creep, and morph – in all directions. Watch out Kansas.

       State efforts to restrict gender-affirming care are moving beyond trans youth and increasingly focused on patients over the age of 18.

       The big picture: Legislators in Kansas, Oklahoma, South Carolina and Texas have introduced bills barring health providers from offering care such as hormone treatments or surgery to people as old as 26.

       http://www.axios.com/2023/03/29/transgender-health-care-adult-ban-bills

       https://reproductiverights.org/maps/abortion-laws-by-state/
       • weka 4.2.1.1

         15 April 2024 at 2:49 pm

         No – would those accounts be consistent with my belief that "on balance, it's better to delay/withhold most/all irreversible [gender-affirming] interventions for as long as possible"?

         I don't know, but I would be interested to know. My point here is that if we're not listening to the first hand accounts of what hormone therapy and surgery means in real terms, then we don't have an adequate understanding of what medical transition is. That lack of understanding has implications for politics as well as youth and clinicians.

         I follow a lot of detrans people on twitter, it's not like those two stories are rare or outliers.

         From that, I have repeatedly heard people saying they weren't given enough information to then give informed consent. No-one can consent to what Ritchie now lives with, so an additional question is have children and their families been lied to?

         And I have little doubt that the lobby groups, activists and NGOs have played a big part in the idea that the drugs and surgeries are safe and a better option.

         There's also a lot of blather from the reactionary side of the GC movements that obscures good understanding.

         So again, this is one of the values of the CR. She's saying we have to have good evidence now.
       • weka 4.2.1.2

         15 April 2024 at 2:53 pm

         I'd prefer that "for as long as possible" wasn't extended to 'forever', but bans can creep, and morph – in all directions. Watch out Kansas.

         NZ is unlikely to follow US politics imo, and more likely to follow the UK. Because of the structure of our legal and health systems, and because of the cultural differences.

         I can't see the rationale for not suspending PB use in gender dysphoria until the research has been done. Equally, affirmation only could be replaced with the kind of holistic models Cass is talking about. And we absolutely need the research on detransition rates and outcomes from current treatment (which was blocked by ideologues in the UK).

         Any trans health care in NZ needs to include care for detrans people. Do you see the inherent resistance to that yet?
         • Drowsy M. Kram 4.2.1.2.1

           15 April 2024 at 3:33 pm

           NZ is unlikely to follow US politics imo…

           Yes, that's unlikely, although “it is difficult to make predictions, especially about the future” – recall MAGA Muller, not to mention our current pro-gun MPs.

           Any trans health care in NZ needs to include care for detrans people. Do you see the inherent resistance to that yet?

           "Inherent resistance" to "health care" "for detrans people" "in NZ"? Not seeing it, inherent or otherwise, but that's not evidential.

           And I might not be understanding (the point of) the question – there are manifold examples of elective and recommended medical procedures that can have negative outcomes, and that includes deliberately withholding treatment. Health professionals do their best to tidy up, or (in what is, I hope and believe, a small percentage of cases) cover up.

           https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Botched_(TV_series)

           https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Euthanasia_in_New_Zealand

           https://www.health.govt.nz/our-work/hospitals-and-specialist-care/surgical-mesh

           https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cartwright_Inquiry
           • weka 4.2.1.2.1.1

             15 April 2024 at 3:35 pm

             can you point me to NZ healthcare services for detrans people?

             are detrans people covered by ACC for their injuries?
             • Drowsy M. Kram …

               15 April 2024 at 3:58 pm

               can you point me to NZ healthcare services for detrans people?

               No, I can't. Maybe there are no such healthcare services available in NZ. That's certainly possible – we’re a small country, and relatively less well-off (as a whole) than we once were. Seems to me that the pressure/stress on our health services and professionals has been increasing for some time.

               are detrans people covered by ACC for their injuries?

               I don't know, but hope someone does – maybe case-by-case?
               • weka …

                 15 April 2024 at 4:21 pm

                 I don’t know either, but I hear rumours that detrans services aren’t available and that ACC won’t cover detransitioners.

                 My point here is that detrans people exist. We know that some of them have huge regret for the lifelong disabilities they now live with, and some of those disabilities are severe. Please read Ritchie’s story.

                 The reason there aren’t detrans health services (this is true in other countries) is because acknowledging the existence of detrans people and their needs breaks the covenant of ‘affirmation only’. There is a direct ideological and political conflict between TRA healthcare demands and the needs of detrans people.

                 Here Owen Jones interviewing Freddy McConnell, mentions the mythical figure of a 1% detrans rate, and FM gives a No Debate response. Afaik no-one knows what th detrans rate is because the research hasn’t been done. In the case of the UK, that’s in part because the adult gender clinics refused to cooperate with the Cass research team (see my post). That’s a medical scandal in its own right. But the 1% figure is used to minimise the existence and needs of detrans people.

                 https://twitter.com/tlitb/status/1779561925967327678

                 Note that TRA healthcare demands probably aren’t what you are talking about. Their demands are a range of things including the idea that anyone who wants hormones and surgery should have them. They are also the ones that have blocked holistic approaches that take into account mental health, abuse, autism, and other approaches.

                 This is political.

                 Detrans people are caught in that because when they need medical specialists to help them deal with persistent urogenital pain and dysfunction for instance, there aren’t any. Because of the politics.

                 But people who haven’t transitioned yet are also caught in those politics. Affirmation only stops us talking about the numbers of lesbian and gay kids going through major body modification when they would otherwise just turn out to be lesbian and gay kids.
                 • Drowsy M. Kram …

                   15 April 2024 at 4:43 pm

                   My point here is that detrans people exist.

                   Naturally – nontrans, trans and detrans people are all real, imho.

                   This really shouldn't be controversial in any sense of the word, but it's a fast-moving and politically-charged field – a minefield really.

                   https://theconversation.com/transgender-regret-research-challenges-narratives-about-gender-affirming-surgeries-220642

                   Please read Ritchie’s story.

                   As unlikely as it seems that reading Ritchie’s story will alter my view that “on balance, it’s better to delay/withhold most/all irreversible [gender-affirming] interventions for as long as possible“, I will steel myself and give it a go.
                   • weka …

                     15 April 2024 at 4:45 pm

                     minefield seems a good descriptor at this point.
                   • Molly …

                     15 April 2024 at 5:45 pm

                     Given the variety of healthcare options, and the difference in change and impact dependent on sex, it is hard to grasp the variety of the different aspects that have to be reviewed.

                     For example: testosterone in women can act as an anti-depressant, can vastly improve energy and libido levels while simultaneously atrophying organs and impacting on fertility, and causing internal pain. Relying only on short-term surveys will capture the patients reports of well-being but not any underlying medical issues.

                     I'm sorting through bookmarks at the moment, and IIRC, I have a link to a table that goes through the different healthcare options separated by sex. (As expected, the hormonal treatment impacts much more significantly on females, and results are more permanent). I will post here if/when I find it.
             • Molly …

               15 April 2024 at 4:37 pm

               There is a info page on Gender Minorities, but it contains the usual curated talkpoints, but will link fyi:

               https://genderminorities.com/2021/03/28/detransition-support/
               • weka …

                 15 April 2024 at 4:50 pm

                 quick glance at that and it seems an improvement. Last time I looked at a NZ resource it was basically saying that detrans people are the ones who the evil terfs have convinced aren't trans and if they just had better support they wouldn't want to detransition. Something like that.
                 • Molly …

                   15 April 2024 at 5:38 pm

                   There is a bit of that retained in the document…
     • Anker 4.2.2

       15 April 2024 at 9:37 pm

       100% WEka about children being able to make their own choice about gender medicine. Ludicrous idea.
5. Shanreagh 5

   15 April 2024 at 11:47 am

   Weka, this is excellent. Thank you

   My thought is that this should be a time of reflection about medical 'misadventure'. My initial thoughts are that it is similar to The Unfortunate Experiment (Cartwright report)

   https://www.womens-health.org.nz/the-cartwright-inquiry/

   The Cartwright report looked at capture/unwillingess to 'pot' anyone, dominance of the medical establishment.

   One of the good things that came out of the recommendations of this enquiry was the establishment of a series of Ethics Committees throughout NZ.

   1 Thinking more about it makes me wonder about the involvement of Ethics Commitees in the setting up of the gender industry in NZ. NZ has around 10 times the number of children on pubery blockers than other similar jurisdictions.

   As far as I can see NZ children have no features that would predispose them to being 10 times in need of irreversible medicines than children in other jurisdictions.

   I am thinking that having accepted less than stellar research from the UK (some of which was not accepted by Cass), the NZ gender industry has been able to build on this to set up their own clincs without an oversight or need to go to Ethics committees.

   2 Bearing in mind that gender dysphoria appears in the DSM-5* it appears that not enough time or money has been devoted to the provision of non chemical or surgical options. This I call watchful waiting and I would couple this with access to long term regualr counselling for both patient and parents.

   *A diagnosis for gender dysphoria is included in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-5), a manual published by the American Psychiatric Association. The diagnosis was created to help people with gender dysphoria get access to necessary health care and effective treatment. The term focuses on discomfort as the problem, rather than identity.

   https://www.mayoclinic.org/diseases-conditions/gender-dysphoria/symptoms-causes/syc-20475255#:~:text=Gender%20dysphoria%20is%20the%20feeling,some%20point%20in%20their%20lives.

   Health care includes counselling and ties in with the maxim of 'first do no harm' & watchful waiting. In pre teens I read somewhere the most effective 'cure' is puberty ie going through puberty without suppressing drugs or cross sex hormones. Support to get there without drugs etc is what I call watchful waiting.

   3 Is this somehow a reflection that society has not in fact accepted that people can be same sex attracted?

   'Young confused-about-identity children/teens are often gay.'

   https://lgballiance.org.uk/conversion-practices-bill-blog/

   The vast majority of young people being put onto irreversible medical pathways are attracted to their own sex.

   In 2015, the Tavistock GIDS Service revealed that 30% of male young people attending were attracted to males and 30% attracted to both males and females (i.e. 60% were homosexual or bisexual). Only 30% said they were attracted exclusively to girls.

   For female attendees, over 50% were attracted to other females, 20% to both males and females (i.e. 70% were homosexual or bisexual). Only 30% were attracted exclusively to males.

   Remember that the UK 2021 census says that only 3.3% of the UK population is lesbian, gay or bisexual. If there was not a problem, we would expect a similar small number of GIDS patients to be LGB. Instead, we can see that LGB people are vastly overrepresented in the young people attending gender identity clinics. GIDS has since stopped publishing any data on the sexual orientation of its patients

   Kemi Badenoch said:

   Kemi Badenoch: I have evidence gay young people are being told they are transgender

   Minister quotes clinicians who believe helping a homosexual child change gender is in effect 'making them straight’

   Headline/teaser paragraphs from

   https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2024/02/06/kemi-badenoch-strong-evidence-gay-young-people-trans/

   This then leads me to think that despite many western jurisdictions doing their very best to outlaw discrimination, give rights to gay people to live as everyone lives eg marriage etc, not everyone supports this.

   In fact it appears to me that some parents would rather their child suffered from irreversible chemical and surgical interventions than accept a child that who is gay. Thus my view that some parents are acting 'in loco deus' my pig Latin for 'standing in the place of god'.

   Hence my view that parents are a necessary part of the counselling that should be marshalled to help children with gender dysphoria. Counselling for any type of childrens mental health is under funded in NZ (on the basis of my sister's experience trying to get help for her troubled teen, not gender related). She paid mega bucks to see a psychiatrist herself to initiate the family help the family needed.

   4 Is this a case of social contagion or a type of reverse moral panic? Cool, calm researched oriented scholars need toinvestigate this.

   Despite the denials and those trying to induce guilt in those who suggest this, this aspect of social contagion is worthy of investigation. We have several instances in recent history eg the McCarthy hearings etc where a witch hunt sought to out wrong thinking people, to the questions that remain during the initial times of the pandemic over the ability of those who set up a moral panic by believing bad actors/ideas on the efficacy of vaccines. This went far beyond the normal questioning etc of the new, anythings. Further back we have witch trials to condemn observant women who did not go along with the prevailing orthodoxy.

   5 In the 'olden days' puberty blockers were used to delay what was called precociuos puberty.

   https://www.mayoclinic.org/diseases-conditions/precocious-puberty/symptoms-causes/syc-20351811

   6 What to do now? Have we someone who is willing to tackle the concept put forward by Patha that the Cass findings are not relevant to NZ.

   https://patha.nz/News/13341582

   https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/nz-government-wont-say-if-it-will-follow-uks-move-to-ban-routine-use-of-puberty-blockers-as-treatment-for-trans-youth/XM4LR3XIVZF2JAKJU74OOELSOU/

   Below from this article

   Taskforce head Dr Hilary Cass – former president of the Royal College of Paediatrics and Child Health – recommended a pause on blockers in light of the short and long-term side effects, including menopausal symptoms, weaker bone density and the potential impact on fertility, sexual function and brain development.

   It was not known whether blockers really provided time for young people to consider their options – or whether they effectively “locked them in” to a medical pathway, she said.

   The report found clinicians were “unable to determine with any certainty” which children and young people would go on to have an enduring trans identity, therefore a medical pathway was not the best way to manage gender-related distress for most.

   “For those young people for whom a medical pathway is clinically indicated, it is not enough to provide this without also addressing wider mental health and/or psychosocially challenging problems.”
   • David 5.1

     15 April 2024 at 6:05 pm

     Shanreagh, this might be slightly off topic, but maybe kinda related. In primary school I was picked up with autism. Much later a Psychiatrist would diagnose me with both ADHD & Autism. I was prescribed Ritalin, my life changed for the better.

     In 2018 I was recovering from an accident, I was referred to a psychologist as I wasn't sleeping. The psychologist thought my sleep issues were related to the autism, she then thought it could be masking homosexuality, or transgender issues, but not autism, she didn't think I had ADHD either.

     I went back (privately) to the Psychiatrist who I'd seen 10 years prior. He diagnosed PTSD from the accident, along with the lingering effects of concussion, from there I received the correct treatment. Fast forward to today, everything is fine, the only change is that I now take the ADHD & Autism much more seriously.

     But its concerning that there has been a push to diagnose autistic children with other issues. My experience is that my social development from being a child, to a teenager, to young adult was slower than for neurotypical children.
     • Molly 5.1.1

       15 April 2024 at 10:02 pm

       That's an interesting anecdote, David. Thanks for sharing on here.
     • Shanreagh 5.1.2

       15 April 2024 at 11:30 pm

       Thanks David. You are a very courageous person. The road for people with ADHD/Autism can be hard enough without it being some sort of semi-automatic pathway to gender issues being raised.

       And the example about the accident/concussion rings bells with me too. My niece had an accident and concussion was noted. Months later when she was not coping at Uni/training college and mental health deterioration was noted. Thankfully before she was put on some sort of inappropriate regime she went to a psychiatrist who diagnosed the lingering affects of concussion. She has been treated but is not as sharp mentally as she was before the concussion.

       The work of those funnelling children into gender clinics and the like seems to me to deny this truism

       'when you hear hoofbeats think horses not zebras'

       Back in the olden days when you saw/experienced discomfort as a teenager you thought 'growing up can be tough/puberty can be tough' not 'living in the wrong body' or 'gender reassignment'.
     • Delia 5.1.3

       20 April 2024 at 3:24 pm

       ..thank goodness you went back to your original doctor.
6. roblogic 6

   15 April 2024 at 11:57 am

   Extreme activism on both sides of gender/sexual politics have effectively poisoned the well so that nobody wants to talk about this stuff. I am sick and tired of it. Thank-you Weka for continuing to speak out for reason and compassion and biological reality.

   These are nuanced issues that do not translate well to a tweet or a soundbite, and require a bit of reflection and effort to understand.

   Punching one another in the face is an admission of failure. Long live democratic debate.

   Nga mihi nui
   • Visubversa 6.1

     15 April 2024 at 12:31 pm

     There is only one side of the "debate" that has sought to shut it down. There is only one side that has used violent language as well as actual physical violence to prevent people speaking about how this ideology harms women and vulnerable young people.

     Only one side has had to be brave enough to risk their employment, their social standing and their actual physical safety to tell the truth.

     Truth Will Always Matter.
     • Shanreagh 6.1.1

       15 April 2024 at 1:01 pm

       I agree Visubversa.

       'No Debate' and those stealthy figures such as the pharmaceutical industry the Pritzker family and Jon Stryker/Arcus foundation have been working for years on this.

       See this article from 2022.

       https://www.nationalreview.com/corner/the-money-behind-the-transgender-movement/

       and this from 2020

       https://www.firstthings.com/web-exclusives/2020/01/the-billionaires-behind-the-lgbt-movement

       Some of these families and their companies also have interests in chemical/pharmaceuticals and surgical devices etc used in trans surgery

       Tabletennis back in 2021 pointed out the links that the Arcus Foundation had in NZ to sponsor various groups

       Tabletennis16.3

       18 July 2021 at 5:24 pm

       For NZ
       Arcus Funding (Us based) helped set up the International Trans Fund – it has been top or near top of the list of sponsors for Gender Minorities Aotearoa for the last few years.Scroll down to the bottom: https://genderminorities.com/

       https://www.arcusfoundation.org/global-trans-initiative/ other donations to NZ organisations /Unis in NZ from Arcus with a focus on trans/human rights
     • Robert Guyton 6.1.2

       15 April 2024 at 2:34 pm

       "There is only one side that has used violent language …"

       Well, no, I don't agree, Visubversa.
       • Dawn Trenberth 6.1.2.1

         15 April 2024 at 2:52 pm

         Depends on how you define violence. I define it as doing bodily harm or threatening bodily harm. If it is defined as saying things people don't like and hurting their feelings I guess the both sides argument makes sense.
         • weka 6.1.2.1.1

           15 April 2024 at 3:34 pm

           I tend to agree about the difference. Also, one person's violent language is water off a duck's back to another, so without specifying, none of us know what the other means.

           One recent example, I wouldn't call this violent, but it is nasty, was some of Sall Grover's supporters took a social media post from Tickle and turned it into the sweaty balls meme, including selling candles with the meme on it as a fund raiser. While I understand the anger, this crosses a line imo, is counter productive, and is the sign of people who don't care that much about others.

           I don't think that is comparable to https://terfisaslur.com/ (actually violent language), but I do think it's not nothing.
           • Psycho Milt 6.1.2.1.1.1

             16 April 2024 at 8:22 am

             What Tickle's doing to Sall Grover is a real test of our integrity, I think. A transsexual replied to a tweet in which I called Tickle a man, pointing out that Tickle's a fellow transsexual, ie has had the surgery and has a birth certificate that says 'female', and it's just nasty to refer to him with male nouns/pronouns. For once, I couldn't agree. I've always considered transsexuals as being different from the porn-addled cross-dressers calling themselves 'transwomen' these days, but I just can't bring myself to feel any goodwill towards Mr Tickle.
             • weka …

               16 April 2024 at 8:39 am

               My sympathy over the sweaty balls stuff diminishes rapidly when I think about the fact that he is basically trying to establish that women don't exist as a sex class.

               The sweaty balls stuff is about what it does to us. It changes the landscape of what is acceptable. I don't find it hard to see how such a thing can be done to women (is done to women). Why would we sanction that?

               It was also a strategic blunder on SG's part of not have distanced herself from it.

               Hard agree about the integrity test. I'm biting my tongue more atm than most other times. Most days I also want to ask if it's ok yet to call NACTF a bunch of c*nts, so it's not like I don't understand what it's like to be that politicallly angry.
   • Dolomedes III 6.2

     15 April 2024 at 1:12 pm

     Punching one another in the face? I'm only aware of one side that's resorted to punching, roblogic.

     Similarly, it's one side in particular that's done its best to get people fired for wrongspeak:

     https://www.theguardian.com/society/2019/dec/18/judge-rules-against-charity-worker-who-lost-job-over-transgender-tweets
   • Anker 6.3

     15 April 2024 at 3:05 pm

     what do you think has been the extreme activism on the GC side Roblogic? What are your examples?

     The tras have championed a no debate campaign.
     • roblogic 6.3.1

       15 April 2024 at 5:01 pm

       It's not the GC feminists themselves that are causing trouble and strife on the GC side, but some of the more excitable and unstable religious conservatives inserting themselves into these issues and stoking a culture war for their own political ends.

       Examples: phobia against gender non conforming people is a real problem, but tolerance shouldn't be taken to a ridiculous extreme of sacrificing the needs of women and girls.
       • weka 6.3.1.1

         15 April 2024 at 5:35 pm

         I agree it is, but it's hard to tell from your link what you are meaning specifically. Can you please give two actual examples?
         • roblogic 6.3.1.1.1

           15 April 2024 at 6:37 pm

           Plenty of sad stories to go around, it's likely that QAnon nutjobs are a significant factor. (Not feminists!)
           • Molly 6.3.1.1.1.1

             15 April 2024 at 9:46 pm

             Hi Rob,

             You link to the HRC. That organisation has promoted some very harmful ideas for women and children lately.

             Jennifer Bilek (again) has a series of 3 guest posts on her blog which are worth reading:

             https://www.the11thhourblog.com/post/all-aboard-the-human-rights-campaign-and-the-making-of-transgender-industry-leaders-part-i

             The Guardian article is a wealth of random occurrences. I don't doubt that a group of Proud Boys may have " interrupted a drag queen event in California, intimidating parents and children and screaming transphobic and homophobic insults. ". However, I consider women responsible for that as much as I consider unassociated men responsible for the regular abuse that women's rights events across the globe.

             Quoted in the article is GLAAD – an organisation that created and maintains a list of non-believers, as mentioned below:

             "The GLAAD Accountability Project monitors and documents individual public figures and groups using their platforms to spread misinformation and false rhetoric against LGBTQ people, youth, and allies. Some groups have misleading names inferring unwarranted expertise or credibility, when their main focus is advocating against LGBTQ people, and some claiming to be grassroots efforts have ties to national organizations with long histories opposing LGBTQ Americans."

             https://glaad.org/gap/

             I've read surveys consider violence to be correctly sexing someone, or challenging their use of opposite sex spaces etc. It is also apparent when looking at injuries or death figures, that the inclusion of sex workers in third world countries make up a majority percentage of victims. Female sex workers in those countries also suffer the same level of violence, injury and death.

             The reason I am being pedantic about this, is that while women have to defend themselves against unearned smears, they are kept from talking about the things that matter to them.

             It is an effective tool for silencing or wearing people down.
7. roblogic 7

   15 April 2024 at 1:13 pm

   I would be more careful with my bedfellows. Cosying up with conservative right-wing outlets like NRO and FT might be fun initially but their mission is far from liberal
   • Anker 7.1

     15 April 2024 at 1:25 pm

     I think this dismissing of "cosying up with conservative right wing outlets"has been another way of shutting down debate.

     Some GC women used any Platform they could to try and get their message out, because the media (particularly in this country) shut down voices sounding the alarm. The newshub report on TVthree when they showed Posie Parker adjusting the zipper on her jersy (and they blacked it out) claimed that she was giving a white supremiscist signal. This shameful misrepresentation again marginalized and silenced many women who were trying to raise the alarm.

     And yes, I agree with Visu who stated the fact that there is only one side who punched the other side in the face. And no condemnation from Marama Davison when asked about this
   • Dolomedes III 7.2

     15 April 2024 at 1:43 pm

     So what exactly are you suggesting roblogic? Gender-critical feminists shouldn't oppose transgender ideology because social conservatives also oppose it?
     • joe90 7.2.1

       15 April 2024 at 2:09 pm

       I think he's suggesting people should be careful who they sit with….
       • weka 7.2.1.1

         15 April 2024 at 2:12 pm

         indeed.
       • Anker 7.2.1.2

         15 April 2024 at 3:02 pm

         I think know who I sit with Joe 90. It is the side that has been called bigots, transphobes and even Nazis and I have stuck with this side because I know I am none of those things and neither are the vast majority of GC women.

         Isn't it about time you faced up to the fact that you have cheered on the side that have insisted on gender affirming care that has all but been discredited by the Cass report? And that what has happened to young, gender confused kids is nothing short of a medical scandal?
         • weka 7.2.1.2.1

           15 April 2024 at 3:28 pm

           that avoids responding to Joe's point.
       • Anker 7.2.1.3

         15 April 2024 at 6:37 pm

         I have been asked to respond to your comment Joe 90, so I will. When I clicked on your link it was an article that if you sit at a table with Nazis you are a Nazi. I didn't see any examples of GC Nazis there. Your arguement is guilt by association, but you fail to mention who the associates are. Who are the Nazis in the GC movement? It will not surprize you to know I have extensive networks in this movement and I haven't come across any Nazis. There are certainly some people, such as extreme christian groups I share virtually nothing in common with. But I completely capable of discerning that.

         I think Joe90 you will find it very difficult to face that you have championed a cause that has turned out to be quite harmful. Or at least it is my impression that you have championed a cause.
         • joe90 7.2.1.3.1

           15 April 2024 at 7:02 pm

           you have championed a cause.

           Put up or stfu
           • Anker 7.2.1.3.1.1

             15 April 2024 at 7:12 pm

             Are you saying Joe 90 that you haven't been an advocate for gender ideology and trans health care? If that is the case i.e that you haven't then that is good.

             Btw, I only said it was my impression, I didn't claim it as a fact.

             And I would appreciate it if you didn't tell me to stfu. I find that a little bit abusive to be honest.
             • Molly …

               15 April 2024 at 8:52 pm

               It IS abusive, Anker.

               But for a bit of light relief, you may find James Dreyfus's tweet today enjoyable, discussing this very acronym:

               I’ve been on this site for 10 years. 10 years. And in all that time, I never understood what STFU really meant. I always thought it was a shortened version of Stuff You! Today, I finally figured it out…

               https://x.com/DreyfusJames/status/1779456415838409030

               The replies are worth the read…
               • Anker …

                 15 April 2024 at 9:41 pm

                 Ha ha ha. Good one. I am not on twitter though so I couldn't read the replies
                 • Molly …

                   16 April 2024 at 10:43 am

                   Give me a heads up if you do. I'll be your first follower.

                   I've got to admit I fought against having to resort to social media, so my account is basically to get information re gender ideology. However, that has meant that I follow a LOT of middle-aged women, whose style of humour is very appealing.
                 • weka …

                   16 April 2024 at 11:07 am

                   get one today, because if they haven't already, twitter are about to introduce fees for new accounts. Which means an end to most new truly pseudonymous accounts.
       • roblogic 7.2.1.4

         15 April 2024 at 6:45 pm

         You overstate the case joe90. All I was suggesting was not to jump into right wing conspiracies, which is where this debate can lead if it's not carefully focussed on medical outcomes and fairness for women.
         • Anker 7.2.1.4.1

           15 April 2024 at 7:14 pm

           Can you give some examples of right wing conspiracys Roblogic? I assume you are referring to gender critical right wing conspiracys or maybe not.

           And yes Rob I acknowledge that you have been a solid supporter of GC views.
           • roblogic 7.2.1.4.1.1

             15 April 2024 at 8:31 pm

             Sites like reduxx and gaysagainstgroomers that focus heavily on demonising gender nonconformists and fringe communities. Pizzagate is probably the most famous example
             • Molly …

               15 April 2024 at 8:43 pm

               Reduxx is not a right-wing site that promotes violence. They are a group of female writers posting on matters to do with women’s rights, and violence AGAINST women and girls.

               I can only find GaysAgainstGroomers as a social media handle, and AFAIK they are a loosely affiliated group via those platforms.

               Did a search on Reduxx for "Pizzagate" and came up with nothing.

               These are disconnected from the commentators on this site.
               • roblogic …

                 15 April 2024 at 8:49 pm

                 Well, good. I have no wish to go digging in sewers but I assure you they exist.
                 • Molly …

                   15 April 2024 at 9:19 pm

                   That kind of vague smearing is unlike you Rob.
                   • Anker …

                     15 April 2024 at 9:42 pm

                     Molly you are gold!
                   • roblogic …

                     15 April 2024 at 10:44 pm

                     I'm not gonna promote hate sites
                   • Molly …

                     16 April 2024 at 10:01 am

                     @Roblogic

                     "I'm not gonna promote hate sites"

                     No one asked you to, Rob.

                     We don't need to curate for adults, the way we do for children. People can assess information themselves without need for pre-warning.
     • weka 7.2.2

       15 April 2024 at 2:13 pm

       Roblogic was supporting us GCFs (and his own GC position) long before you were on the scene. Settle down eh, and maybe have a conversation without accusation.
       • Dolomedes III 7.2.2.1

         15 April 2024 at 2:54 pm

         Sorry, who am I accusing? And how would you know how long I've opposed transgender ideology?
   • Dawn Trenberth 7.3

     15 April 2024 at 2:56 pm

     So are people who support trans rights implicated by the violent far left antifa thugs who.have jumped on to their cause?.
     • roblogic 7.3.1

       15 April 2024 at 7:05 pm

       Some people who should know better, have failed to denounce the violence at Albert Park. That signals a deplorable lack of willingness to engage in good faith.
   • Molly 7.4

     15 April 2024 at 5:16 pm

     It would be helpful if you were more specific.

     For example, apart from the multiple cancellation events, there have been numerous lists circulating that single out individuals and organisations for censure (and provide details for targettted harassment)

     I am unaware of any such lists being created, circulated and used by middle-aged women, and would appreciate if you have any links to such. (This is not a half-hearted request, I'm collecting links on this issue ATM).

     For example:

     GLAAD Accountability Project: https://glaad.org/gap/

     Transgender Map – who have removed menu navigation to list but still retains posts which can be found using the search "vs." to pull up 66 pages.

     Link to author Abigail Shrier for example of entry – https://www.transgendermap.com/issues/topics/media/abigail-shrier/

     Shinigami Eyes – Browser plug in which "A browser addon that highlights transphobic and trans-friendly social network pages and users with different colors." https://shinigami-eyes.github.io/

     Report a Transphobe – Publicly available Google spreadsheet

     https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1v-4Rk-ynHC0MrG5FyuDZsYp743w0WFiO6caY80Yg4Y8/edit#gid=224057797

     BlockTogether – a website that at the time of closing June 16 2020 had the following stats:
     303k registered users.
     198k users subscribing to at least one list.
     4.5k users offering a list, with at least one subscriber.
     3.7B actions.

     This website was used to write a thesis: https://digitalcommons.dartmouth.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1164&context=senior_theses

     There are numerous other lists – that rise and fall depending on author and exposure.

     The one notable example I can find on t'other side, is the Cultblocker list that provides a list of accounts to automatically block to avoid harassment. They do not provide the list of accounts publicly as far as I can determine and I don't know whether it is still current as it used the now defunct BlockTogether referenced above for some data. https://cultblockerpro.wordpress.com/
     • roblogic 7.4.1

       15 April 2024 at 5:42 pm

       Yeah my twitter handle is on one of those stupid lists.

       We can see from the antics of Destiny Church (vs rainbow crossings and drag storytime), that there are a significant numbers of people who feel their values are being trampled by the LGBTQ+ movement and its quasi religious hegemonic tendencies, and are willing to take action.

       There are much more extreme and violent examples overseas.
       • Molly 7.4.1.1

         15 April 2024 at 5:53 pm

         I find that I am unwilling to apologise for the actions of others – particularly men with whom I have no relationship, and absolutely no influence.

         I consider their painting of the rainbow crossing to be an action that I wouldn't personally take – but also consider the original painting of the crossing to be an expenditure I do not support.

         (I do have real concerns about painting rainbows on a road that might attract children to run onto it. It makes no logical sense to me.)
         • Anker 7.4.1.1.1

           15 April 2024 at 6:44 pm

           100% agree Molly.

           About taking responsibility for a lone gunman in the States. Whereas in NZ the Greens attended Albert Park and they failed to condemn the violence against the women there.

           I also agree about Rainbow crossings, particularly as I live in Wellington. Please fix our pipes.

           But also the Rainbow flag, crossing etc appears to have been colonised by the TQ. A lot of lesbian women I know now hate the Rainbow Flag which is sad
         • Anker 7.4.1.1.2

           15 April 2024 at 6:44 pm

           100% agree Molly.

           About taking responsibility for a lone gunman in the States. Whereas in NZ the Greens attended Albert Park and they failed to condemn the violence against the women there.

           I also agree about Rainbow crossings, particularly as I live in Wellington. Please fix our pipes.

           But also the Rainbow flag, crossing etc appears to have been colonised by the TQ. A lot of lesbian women I know now hate the Rainbow Flag which is sad
       • Molly 7.4.1.2

         15 April 2024 at 6:08 pm

         Sorry, I missed your link the first time around.

         The inference that women here are culpable for that man's behaviour in any way is not one I will accept. It was a horrific incident, in the same way that Bondi Junction was a horrific incident. The person responsible is the one who wielded the weapon, unless some connection can be made to others persuading them to take action in such a murderous way.
         • roblogic 7.4.1.2.1

           15 April 2024 at 6:40 pm

           Shanreagh was posting links to right-wing sites – my comment (7) was intended as a reply to that, but I messed it up from my phone.
           • Molly 7.4.1.2.1.1

             15 April 2024 at 7:27 pm

             
           • Molly 7.4.1.2.1.2

             15 April 2024 at 8:38 pm

             Just had a look. Can't see the links to right-wing sites that you mention. Particularly not ones that promote violence.
             • roblogic …

               15 April 2024 at 8:57 pm

               National Review: the propaganda arm of a Conservative thinktank

               First Things: American Catholic Christian Nationalists

               There is a wider agenda here, to get the working class angry about gender theory, instead of much more acute and urgent class injustices that are more mundanely eroding lives and the wellbeing of entire nations.
               • MollyJ …

                 15 April 2024 at 9:30 pm

                 I don't purity test sites before reading. I check out information provided by alternative recognisable sites. Shanreagh's linked article on the National Review was mostly a copy of paste of Jennifer Bilek's work. She has her own blog where the information may be more palatable to you.

                 https://www.the11thhourblog.com/

                 I am also aware that left-wing journalists were hounded from their left-wing publications for wanting to write on this issue. Suzanne Moore from the Guardian is one that comes to mind. Conservative platforms do not appear to suffer from the same groupthink.

                 I see the First Things link goes to another full reprint of a Bilek article.

                 It'd be better for discussion if you critiqued the content.
                 • weka …

                   15 April 2024 at 9:34 pm

                   please fix your username.
                   • Molly …

                     15 April 2024 at 9:48 pm

                     Sorry, I must've added the letter when trying to post. I keep getting timed out, and resorting to a lot of copies and pastes.

                     Apologies.
               • Anker …

                 15 April 2024 at 9:47 pm

                 Ok I haven't read the link tbf Roblogic, but for goodness sake! Does it not occur to you that maybe the working class are able to think for themselves and feel geniunely angry about gender ideology and its imposition on them and their kids. Maybe those working class parents see the crap their kids are being taught for themselves and get it all by themselves what a pernious hold this ideology has had on society.
               • Shanreagh …

                 15 April 2024 at 10:56 pm

                 There is a wider agenda here, to get the working class angry about gender theory, instead of much more acute and urgent class injustices that are more mundanely eroding lives and the wellbeing of entire nations.

                 I might be a bit thick tonight or misreading this.

                 Correct me if I am wrong but the way I read this is that your thought is that 'people' are using gender to rile the WC when there are much worthier issues to be tackling.

                 I have left off the 'theory' as I don't think there is much theory involved when 12 year girls and younger see naked men with erect penisesor even flaccid ones in changing rooms or when women are confronted with a man in a public toilet, let alone having sporting options denied them and WC women do actually often play sport.

                 If by some chance you did mean this then perhaps ponder on the fact that women comprise 51% of most populations and that WC women and others are capable of walking and chewing gum at the same time.

                 If I have misread this could you pl rewrite it so it is less confusing
           • Shanreagh 7.4.1.2.1.3

             15 April 2024 at 10:45 pm

             Sorry I was not. I was posting an old article by Jennifer Bilek reported in First Things which shock horror is some sort of Christian magazine.

             If you had read my post you will have noted it was about who and when we were being warned about these wealthy males & their companies behind the trans movement. Bilek was one who warned. Her paper, at the time, was more interesting than who printed it.

             Now of course the 'who' published and 'why only they' published is interesting too. Most of us would have thought that our support ie for women's rights to sport/safe spaces would have come from the left. We (women) were of course wrong about this.

             I had no idea what the initials were in your post NRO or FT so ignored it but now realise now that FT apparently stands for 'First Things.'
       • Shanreagh 7.4.1.3

         15 April 2024 at 11:05 pm

         As a woman I actually support the views against Drags in libraries both from a taste/exposure point of view and because I think it is a waste of money for Councils in these straitened times to be paying for this. Opportunities exist for parents keen to go with their children to these events for them to book and pay for them.

         Again on the crossings as it was a political act to place them there in the first place the painting over is also a political act. As a political act the rainbow crossings have served their purpose and many people now are just sick of the sight of rainbow anythings.
8. Shanreagh 8

   15 April 2024 at 2:53 pm

   Here is another article setting out the myths that have been promulgated about the Cass Review.

   https://www.quackometer.net/blog/2024/04/breaking-down-cass-review-myths-and-misconceptions-what-you-need-to-know.html

   Many trans advocacy groups appear to be cautiously welcoming these recommendations. However, there are many who are not and have quickly tried to condemn the review. Within almost hours, “press releases“, tweets and commentaries tried to rubbish the report and included statements that were simply not true. An angry letter from many “academics”, including Andrew Wakefield, has been published. These myths have been subsequently spreading like wildfire.

   Four myths so far examined, explained and rebutted

   1 Myth 1: 98% of all studies in this area were ignored

   2 Myth 2: Cass recommended no Trans Healthcare for Under 25s.

   3 Myth 3: Cass is demanding only Double Blind Randomised Controlled Trials be used as evidence in “Trans Healthcare”.

   4 Myth 4: There were less than 10 detransitioners out of 3499 patients in the Cass study.

   The author has said they will be adding as further myths are publicised.
   • Shanreagh 8.1

     17 April 2024 at 2:48 pm

     Here is the second tranche of rebuttal on the myths on the Cass Review. This is done by an organisation call Quackometer. NB I have not purity tested the organisation but the work done seems level headed and fair.

     https://www.quackometer.net/blog/2024/04/breaking-down-cass-review-myths-and-misconceptions-what-you-need-to-know-part-2.html

     The only personal view I have found so far (not looked very carefully) is this about the WPATH guidelines

     On a personal note, I have to say the WPATH guidelines can only be read as deeply dishonest or utterly incompetent.
9. James Thrace 9

   15 April 2024 at 8:40 pm

   One of the interesting things about this comment thread:

   Women – biologically sexed, are commenting in good faith and highlighting the actual and real concerns.

   Men – as usual, not affected by the encroachment onto women’s spaces by men wanting to be women, continue to punch down on biologically sexed women by all but characterising their views as histrionic or ridiculous.
   • Molly 9.1

     15 April 2024 at 8:46 pm

     
   • Anker 9.2

     15 April 2024 at 9:14 pm

     Or telling them to stfu
     • Molly 9.2.1

       15 April 2024 at 9:50 pm

       LOL – which according to the James Dreyfus thread I gave you, means Lots Of Love for us middle-aged women…
   • gsays 9.3

     15 April 2024 at 9:24 pm

     Their arguments are so weak and irrelevant that the inevitable Nazi slur gets bandied about. A sure sign that there isn't a leg to stand on.
   • SPC 9.4

     15 April 2024 at 10:05 pm

     Which ones?
   • No-Skates 9.5

     16 April 2024 at 9:38 am

     I thought the importance of this study was the concern over whether the choice to transition is being properly informed or is resulting in desirable health outcomes?

     Or perhaps it's just another attempt at finding ammunition for TERF's to further alienate a group of people who already experience exclusion from our wider society?

     The former would be more believable if you'd continued to feign concern about trans people's wellbeing and kept the ulterior motive quiet.

     [terf is routinely used as a slur against women, often in misogynistic ways including violence and sexual violence online. It’s also a highly inaccurate and misleading label. I moderate its use on TS. Please find other language if you want to comment further – weka]
     • Molly 9.5.1

       16 April 2024 at 9:58 am

       "Or perhaps it's just another attempt at finding ammunition for TERF's to further alienate a group of people who already experience exclusion from our wider society?"

       I suspect those you would call TERFs, are the ones who are most accepting of diversity of people in society. What they don't do is comply with demands to lie about reality, nor be quiet about the impacts of legislative or policy changes.

       As one of those you would call a TERF (I have my own words associated with that ACRONYM so it's not a problem), I consider it interesting to observe the implicit and sustained rejection by men of other men in their sex category that don't meet their expectations of what a man is.

       That is NOT acceptance in any shape or form.
       • No-Skates 9.5.1.1

         16 April 2024 at 12:38 pm

         "I consider it interesting to observe the implicit and sustained rejection by men of other men in their sex category that don't meet their expectations of what a man is."

         Oh boy do I feel this. Toxic masculinity is a minefield. You ride an e-scooter once in you're life and all of a sudden you're not a viable candidate for propagating the human race.

         To clarify; I'm a straight white man. I can only speak to the experiences detailed to me by friends and family. Some of them being trans. Some met before or after their transition, and some electing not to transition and instead presenting themselves as their gender identity (cause hormones and surgery are scary.) I'm someone that's just trying to make the best sense of things and be accommodating to them.

         Where I get upset is the insinuation of it being an elaborate ruse to allow "fake women" to invade women's spaces.

         The clarification above means no, I can't truly experience the impact of a masculine face in a women's restroom. People look behind their backs at me nervously on dark nights if we're coincidentally heading the same direction (which leaves me feeling like a monster, but I get it.)

         But I do have friends who have transitioned, and I don't like hearing them being lumped in with deviants and perverts. And I see a lot of the research akin to flat earthers trying to find evidence, not in a pursuit of truth but to confirm what they already believe to be true. And their truth belittles my friends.

         Shanreagh's response is good, I need more time to digest that. That's fair, medical research needs a (gender) critical eye keeping watch. But comment's like James'? That's just cruel and divisive.
         • James Thrace 9.5.1.1.1

           16 April 2024 at 12:49 pm

           What’s cruel and divisive is that the problems with the no-debate crowd have long been raised by very brave biologically sexed women and females has resulted in perjorative slurs being developed and thrown at those biologically sexed women and females simply because “no debate” was the aim.

           as a homosexual male, I think its extremely important to let adult human females have their agency of female spaces and voice their concerns around the safety of those spaces, along with their (proven) concerns of the medical establishment, at the behest of the “no debate” crowd rushing to put very young children on a wide array of drugs simply because the child appears to show an inclination for a gender preference that is other than their biological sex.

           Then along come the (largely) straight males shouting (and punching) down the adult human females and ridiculing them and calling them slurs.

           as far as I am concerned, the division hasn’t been fomented by adult human females, but by the likes of Shaneel Lal, and other trans rights activists.
           • Shanreagh 9.5.1.1.1.1

             16 April 2024 at 2:01 pm

             Thanks James, another thoughtful response.
           • Delia 9.5.1.1.1.2

             20 April 2024 at 3:03 pm

             Right on James.
           • veutoviper 9.5.1.1.1.3

             20 April 2024 at 3:22 pm

             My thanks also, James, for your thoughtful insight and understanding – and very clear expression of the situation many biological females such as myself find ourselves in.

             IMO your third para is of particular relevance.
           • SPC 9.5.1.1.1.4

             20 April 2024 at 3:33 pm

             Then along come the (largely) straight males shouting (and punching) down the adult human females and ridiculing them and calling them slurs.

             An unsubstantiated reckon about a group you are not part of.

             This all began as

             1.a response to decriminalisation of homosexuality and acceptance.

             2.feminists claiming gender equality – despite difference between male and female

             3.the emergence of a culture derived from not consorting in public as same sex (thus transvestites and "butch" dressing women).

             The DSM of 1980.

             The concept of "gender identity" was not imposed on women by men, it was an ideological concept designed to include all despite difference.

             Support for it is as high amongst women as men.

             It was National who brought in gender ID on drivers licenses and passports – and all its MP's voted for self-ID.

             As far as I am concerned, the division hasn’t been fomented by adult human females, but by the likes of Shaneel Lal, and other trans rights activists.

             Shaneel Lal is a non binary young person who inherited gender identity culture – because he did not conform to cis gender male stereotype.

             Just like some gay people a generation earlier.
             • weka …

               20 April 2024 at 6:15 pm

               a flaw in your argument is the absence of acknowledgement of AGPs. Once that is factored in, the whole analysis changes.

               The concept of "gender identity" was not imposed on women by men, it was an ideological concept designed to include all despite difference.

               My first knowledge of the problem was in the 90s, with two events. One was the challenge by transsexual males to the women-only policy at Mitchfest. The other was a similar challenge to Vancouver Rape Relief. Both organisations tried to accommodate trans women, it didn't work. Because what those TW wanted was to colonise women's spaces.

               VRR survived, Mitchfest didn't.

               So yeah, GI has always been imposed on women be men.

               Further, in the more recent iteration, it's has largely been men harassing and abusing women who speak out. Men speaking out don't get the same kind or level of abuse, although some of them get the same kind of cancellation.

               https://terfisaslur.com/

               Shaneel Lal is a non binary young person who inherited gender identity culture – because he did not conform to cis gender male stereotype.

               But he wants to enforce gender stereotypes and roles on women. He's also one of the ones that abuses women who speak out. New misogyny same as the old.
     • Shanreagh 9.5.2

       16 April 2024 at 10:37 am

       The final report is a carefully worded document designed particularly for the systems of power in charge of child health, wellbeing and safeguarding: health systems and their managers, medical practitioners and their professional bodies, MPs and government departments, and NGOs.

       It’s also a damning indictment of the poorly evidence medical experiment that has been done on gender non-conforming children in the past decade. It’s likely to be the biggest medical scandal many of us will see.

       Above from Weka's opening paragraphs.

       Both the report and Weka's post cover both aspects of the Cass Review. We are not going to get anywhere by allowing poor- and ideology-based factors to govern the health access we give to children who are struggling with mental health issues. This why many of the responses do focus on the so-called evidence for doing these irreversible actions.

       The reason is so that the care we (as a society) give is the best and most evidence based care we can provide.

       We all bring our own experiences and many women of an age will bring experiences that were also poor. Some suffered needlessly/others died prematurely as a result of Drs' actions as documented in the Unfortunate Experiment here in NZ.

       We lived through times when women who had contraception failure had to fly to Aus for abortions, when there were blatant shortages of certifying consultants who were not fronts for anti abortion campaigners, times when searching for a new Dr in a new city you went to look at a file called the 'Hot & cold Drs' file before making a decision. This file had notes of women's experiences with Drs in a large town or city so you knew who to avoid. Rural people or some smaller towns, sorry, you just had to take who had decided to put out their shingle there.

       Like the NHS gender clinics the Unfortunate Experiment occured at a publicly funded provided organisation. In some cases this means there is no choice as many cannot afford to go privately.

       So forgive us/them if this shocking care for the trans community just seems like a re-run of what has gone before of systemic wrongs being allowed to flourish. The patient is at the very end of much poor quality care just as they were in earlier times.

       Of course getting better care will mean a lessening, hopefully, of irreversible chemical 'treatment' and surgery in gender non-conforming children in the UK. It will also mean a greater need for counselling & support in the UK. If the same pattern about funding for counselling out in the community applies to the UK as it does in NZ, ie hopeless access, then I feel we are right to continue to point this out.

       You may think that this forewarning or harking back to similar failings means we do not care. No in fact we do care and that is why the Cass Review is making many women hopping mad, quite apart from the justifcation/I told you so feelings.

       The fact that:

       no records are kept, or none that the clinics wanted to share with Cass,

       there was a one eyed one track to either prescriptions (puberty blockers then cross sex hormones) or surgery

       the lack of access to long term counselling

       All of these are distressingly familiar to women who are responsible in many cases for their own health/wellness as well as being the most likely to be taking children to health professionals. It is also this care for distressed children that has 'lead some parents by the nose' to a situation where chemicals and/or surgery are presented as TINA options.
       • Molly 9.5.2.1

         16 April 2024 at 10:49 am

         I am humbled by your thoughtful reply, Shanreagh.

         @No-skates – -what she just said.
         • Shanreagh 9.5.2.1.1

           16 April 2024 at 11:12 am

           Thank you Molly.
       • Delia 9.5.2.2

         20 April 2024 at 3:17 pm

         Well said, proud of you.
     • weka 9.5.3

       16 April 2024 at 11:04 am

       mod note.
       • No-Skates 9.5.3.1

         16 April 2024 at 12:13 pm

         Apologies. I'll avoid using the term from here on.
         • weka 9.5.3.1.1

           16 April 2024 at 12:20 pm

           cheers.
10. Anker 10

    15 April 2024 at 9:48 pm

    100% gsays
11. weka 11

    16 April 2024 at 10:38 am

    Dropping the puberty blockers are "safe and fully reversible" links here. Please add if you have any.

    The MoH's advice 20/12/17

    Transgender New Zealanders: Children and young people

    …

    Puberty blockers

    For young people where these feelings continue into puberty or emerge during puberty, particularly if associated with distress, it is important to see a health professional. Puberty blockers are a medication that can be used to halt the physical changes of an unwanted puberty.

    Blockers are a safe and fully reversible medicine that may be used from early puberty through to later adolescence to help ease distress and allow time to fully explore gender health options.

    Service providers that can help access blockers include:

    • paediatric services
    • youth health services
    • endocrinologists
    • primary health care teams.

    https://archive.is/bmiY9#selection-1679.0-1679.49
    • weka 11.1

      16 April 2024 at 10:40 am

      this Family First press release covers it,

      https://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/PO2209/S00147/puberty-blockers-not-safe-reversible-ministry-of-health.htm

      You have no idea how fucked off I am that I have to rely on FF for this, instead of it being all over progressive media.
      • Bob McCoskrie 11.1.1

        16 April 2024 at 7:10 pm

        You’re welcome 😀
12. francesca 12

    16 April 2024 at 11:09 am

    Sue Bagshaw has defended the use of puberty blockers .Her clinic prescribes them at a rate that exceeds th UK ….65% of children who present with gender distress are put on puberty blockers.

    How much of that is because of our woeful mental health provision?

    If you're going to say 'let's not use them' [puberty blockers], we're going to have redouble our efforts to ensure the mental health of transgender diverse young people is looked after," Bagshaw said.

    "And at the moment, it's not."

    Offering psycho-social support as first-line treatment for gender dysphoria in young people was challenging, she said.

    "It's actually quite difficult to help them to understand that they're being listened to without doing something, and that's the nature of brain development and it's also the nature of short appointment times."

    Psychological interventions were also expensive, she said.

    https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/national/475757/puberty-blocker-use-jumps-as-expert-backs-results
13. Shanreagh 13

    16 April 2024 at 4:44 pm

    I have just watched this documentary. It is called The Lost Boys – searching for Manhood. It follows several detransitioners and desisters (you'll hear the difference in the documentary) This is a sad gentle film.

    'These 5 young men walked the path of finding their true selves. Their stories will shape how you see the trans movement.'

    Released 23/1/24 by the Centre for Bioethics and Culture.

    https://cbc-network.org/about/

    This is being released at public showings in London where the same secrecy is being followed as with the films about ‘What is a Woman’. Dates put up, times put up, general location put up but exact one will be released very close to the starting time. They are expecting protesters. those who follow MrMenno on X will not be surprised that he is taking a lead role in getting this out to the public.
14. Delia 14

    20 April 2024 at 3:11 pm

    I was born in 1957. I have a confession, I was a jealous seven year old, jealous of boys with cap guns. If we allow this stereotyped theory to continue regarding gender would it be that in 2034 if I were a seven year old, would my lust for cap guns see me transitioned? I fear it might because as far as I can see, transgender theory is all about female and male stereotypes which many of us fought against from the seventies. Women must be hyper feminine and men hypermasculine that is the message this retrograde ideology gives to me and defenders can dress it up all they like…our most vulnerable youth have been used in this social experiment, those who are gay, lesbian, or autistic..one truly has too question the motivations of those who created it. In fact we have read the back stories of so called pioneer sex change theorists and it is grubby reading. I do not trust an historic history like that to guide how we support our most vulnerable youth.

• Comments are now closed

• Log in
• Donate
• Contribute post

• Articles RSS