InArduisFouette
Well-Known Member
Cal isa brilliant writer on this subject and understands the academic and clinicla evidence very well
Transgender hate crimes recorded by police go up 81%
- Thread starter editor
- Start date
Miss-Shelf
I'll meet you further on up the road
I found it useful to understand the subtle but so often used
This section below really stood out for me because this is the same dynamic that operates to sympathetically frame transphobia in the media
belboid
Exasperated, not angry.
I found this a good retort
transwrites.world
The Cass Review: A government-sanctioned attack on trans lives - Trans Writes
The Cass Review faces condemnation for its biased approach, exclusion of trans voices, and potential harm to trans youth.
transwrites.world
krtek a houby
Merry Xmas!
Any idea what the "agenda" is that you mentioned but seem terrified to expand on?
Interesting thread on this from Stephen Whittle:
It seems the data request was an attempt to match up former GIDS patients with those who had gone through the process of obtaining a Gender Rceognition Certificate (GRC) as adults as a way of evidencing 'sucessful treatment', presumably meaning those who didn't would be viewed as having detransitioned or whose treatment was unsuccessful.
And yet they've made it such a nightmare to get a GRC that very few bother, especially younger people who may not have the necessary evidence of bills in their name etc. It's an obvious stitch up and understandable why clinics refused to share patient data without consent. Now it looks like they are going to be forced to.
And now it looks like they are coming for healthcare for those over 25 as well.
And plenty more people are perfectly happy and successfully living their lives during/post transition without one.
I'm not even sure what the point of a GRC is. I look it up every time it comes up and apparently the answer is so irrelevant to my life that I immediately forget again every time.
The idea that GRC numbers have anything to do with clinical outcomes is totally batshit.
InArduisFouette
Well-Known Member
and having a GRC has nothing to do with having a correct NHS number
infact having the correct NHS number is part of the evidence required to be submitted to get a GRC
Cass has in fact admitted to a breach of the law around data protection and patient identifiable data and as such in a just world would be facing the MPTS for this
Last edited:
It's difficult to know whether Cass actually understands this but is so ideologically committed she doesn't care, or whether those involved in the review, who we know are opposed to trans healthcare, have influenced some of these decisions. But taking her at face value, then these types of problems would have been unlikely if she'd allowed any actual trans people to be involved with the report
Raheem
Well-Known Member
I doubt she's ideologically committed, but the government wanted a report that would support their election strategy (they're straight out of the traps trying to make it so). She'll have come under pressure to ensure she maintained "balance", and later this year she'll get a damehood.
I'm not so sure. I've only skim read it so far but it's full of gender critical talking points presented with almost no criticism, including some of the more far out shit like kids are being transed by the internet or are becoming trans because they might get picked on if they came out as gay. It's unlikely she's come up with this stuff off the top of her head and given the complete lack of any published evidence for any of it the only place it's likely to have come from is gender critical groups and individuals.
It's also notable that GC groups seem to have been given an embargoed copy of the report in advance whereas it seems trans supportive groups weren't.
Balbi
Hey, Dean Yager!
Hello from down here in NZ.
Good statement from PATHA here about why Cass sucks: PATHA - Professional Association for Transgender Health Aotearoa - Cass Review out of step with high-quality care provided in Aotearoa
Also notable that Dame Cass has immediately gone on to warn about the conversion therapy ban: Hilary Cass warns Kemi Badenoch over risks of conversion practices ban | Gender | The Guardian
This matters because lots of countries, including Aotearoa New Zealand, have banned Conversion Therapy without the "risks" coming true. What it has meant is a lot of the pray away the gay stopped, and it's quack medicinal equivalents too.
Britain, it's media and establishment, seem to have a real problem with trans people and their rights. Other countries have banned conversion therapy, it works. But you can't use those examples, you have to listen to the Dame who just wrote a pretty bad review.
It was the same with the Gender self-ID legislation. Theresa May (!) promised it as a simple regulatory change in 2017, and it has already been in place for over a decade on many other countries.
But not Britain. Westminster even prevented Scotland using their legitimate authority to introduce the legislation, because of the "risks" which the GC lobby and the right wing continually yell about - but never use evidence from where legislation like it exists, without incident, in other countries.
A small, sad, fading country that's deciding to deal with it's failures by ignoring the world and going after minority rights - yeah, that's Britain right now.
Looking at it this way, with treef being a dude the UK just isn't a safe place for our family ever to return to permanently (not that we were planning to) but even visiting begs some serious questions.
The UK govt has started work on listing nations with gender self-ID laws because they don't wish to extend those rights to their own people, or for immigrants or returning citizens to use their entirely legal documentation of their transition or gender identity.
It's amazing how fucking toxic the debate is over there, how it's been presented and how sad it is that the closure of GIDS and the devolving of services was welcome by trans folks and parents - only for service provision to be effectively shutting on them, and their dangerous waitlist of 5000 being shunted onto the even bigger waiting list for mental health support.
That Labour are fully behind Cass, and haven't at all listened to criticisms, even that wetwipe Streeting saying he regrets saying trans women are women trans men are men, get over it (which is the equality act and the law folks) means things ain't getting better with a changed government.
In short any progress made from the 90's to the 2010's is now being very deliberately halted and reversed. I've heard it be called the modern section 28 and they're not wrong, except it's not the whole community, it's just trans people.
Puberty blockers won't be used for gender affirming care because there's not enough evidence and concerns about their effects. They will still be used to treat precocious puberty, to halt it until the young person is ready.
So what's dangerous for trans kids is safe for cis kids? Yeah, that's real normal.
There's the other bit of this too. This all kicked off because of Bell v Tavistock, which got overturned because the NHS made no error in law.
The lawyer in that case is the virulently anti-abortion lawyer Paul Conrathe, who wants to target Gillick Competence that allows young people access to contraception and abortion by informed consent.
When Bell was overturned he said Gillick was not fit for purpose. He's now representing a case against the Care Quality Commission for authorising private gender clinics, trying to get all hormone therapy for trans kids revoked on the same grounds - that they can't consent. These are the clinics that basically did the job the very underresourced NHS could have been doing. They want them shut down.
Given Cass has said the NHS should very very reluctantly prescribe them for 16+ who are judged competent under Gillick, even stretching out that reluctance until they are 25 (so denying legal adults the ability to choose their care) how long do you think the Cass precedent is going to turn up in a case saying young people don't have informed consent about abortion and contraception?
This has never just been about trans kids, or trans people. It's always been about how young people make choices about their lives and bodies which a very, very dangerously resourced and insane group of people want to remove.
A lot of the Lgbtqi community have been yelling about this for YEARS but have been mostly ignored because the British media and it's cheerleaders have tried to make this discussion about whether trans people are dangerous, and they've been given free reign.
It's fucking disgusting.
Good statement from PATHA here about why Cass sucks: PATHA - Professional Association for Transgender Health Aotearoa - Cass Review out of step with high-quality care provided in Aotearoa
Also notable that Dame Cass has immediately gone on to warn about the conversion therapy ban: Hilary Cass warns Kemi Badenoch over risks of conversion practices ban | Gender | The Guardian
This matters because lots of countries, including Aotearoa New Zealand, have banned Conversion Therapy without the "risks" coming true. What it has meant is a lot of the pray away the gay stopped, and it's quack medicinal equivalents too.
Britain, it's media and establishment, seem to have a real problem with trans people and their rights. Other countries have banned conversion therapy, it works. But you can't use those examples, you have to listen to the Dame who just wrote a pretty bad review.
It was the same with the Gender self-ID legislation. Theresa May (!) promised it as a simple regulatory change in 2017, and it has already been in place for over a decade on many other countries.
But not Britain. Westminster even prevented Scotland using their legitimate authority to introduce the legislation, because of the "risks" which the GC lobby and the right wing continually yell about - but never use evidence from where legislation like it exists, without incident, in other countries.
A small, sad, fading country that's deciding to deal with it's failures by ignoring the world and going after minority rights - yeah, that's Britain right now.
Looking at it this way, with treef being a dude the UK just isn't a safe place for our family ever to return to permanently (not that we were planning to) but even visiting begs some serious questions.
The UK govt has started work on listing nations with gender self-ID laws because they don't wish to extend those rights to their own people, or for immigrants or returning citizens to use their entirely legal documentation of their transition or gender identity.
It's amazing how fucking toxic the debate is over there, how it's been presented and how sad it is that the closure of GIDS and the devolving of services was welcome by trans folks and parents - only for service provision to be effectively shutting on them, and their dangerous waitlist of 5000 being shunted onto the even bigger waiting list for mental health support.
That Labour are fully behind Cass, and haven't at all listened to criticisms, even that wetwipe Streeting saying he regrets saying trans women are women trans men are men, get over it (which is the equality act and the law folks) means things ain't getting better with a changed government.
In short any progress made from the 90's to the 2010's is now being very deliberately halted and reversed. I've heard it be called the modern section 28 and they're not wrong, except it's not the whole community, it's just trans people.
Puberty blockers won't be used for gender affirming care because there's not enough evidence and concerns about their effects. They will still be used to treat precocious puberty, to halt it until the young person is ready.
So what's dangerous for trans kids is safe for cis kids? Yeah, that's real normal.
There's the other bit of this too. This all kicked off because of Bell v Tavistock, which got overturned because the NHS made no error in law.
The lawyer in that case is the virulently anti-abortion lawyer Paul Conrathe, who wants to target Gillick Competence that allows young people access to contraception and abortion by informed consent.
When Bell was overturned he said Gillick was not fit for purpose. He's now representing a case against the Care Quality Commission for authorising private gender clinics, trying to get all hormone therapy for trans kids revoked on the same grounds - that they can't consent. These are the clinics that basically did the job the very underresourced NHS could have been doing. They want them shut down.
Given Cass has said the NHS should very very reluctantly prescribe them for 16+ who are judged competent under Gillick, even stretching out that reluctance until they are 25 (so denying legal adults the ability to choose their care) how long do you think the Cass precedent is going to turn up in a case saying young people don't have informed consent about abortion and contraception?
This has never just been about trans kids, or trans people. It's always been about how young people make choices about their lives and bodies which a very, very dangerously resourced and insane group of people want to remove.
A lot of the Lgbtqi community have been yelling about this for YEARS but have been mostly ignored because the British media and it's cheerleaders have tried to make this discussion about whether trans people are dangerous, and they've been given free reign.
It's fucking disgusting.
A nation of bullies.
Jennaonthebeach
What would Picard do?
A nation of the bullied too.
krtek a houby
Merry Xmas!
Nice to see you back
InArduisFouette
Well-Known Member
trans supportive groups were given advanced copies, but like the NHS bodies given copies they did not leak to the media before the embargo expired
_Russ_
Never not Knowingly Misunderstood
There are bullies on both sides of this and its pretty clear which side is doing the best at shutting down objective discussion on the subject
‘This isn’t how good scientific debate happens’: academics on culture of fear in gender medicine research
From where I can see one side just wants to live…
Balbi
Hey, Dean Yager!
Yeah that'd be the side cheering the disregarding almost the entire body of research because they weren't double blind studies. Ignoring that a study of that type isn't ethical in paediatric care of this type.
Here's a cartoon to explain why a double blind study for puberty blockers is ethically very bad:
Oh but they quote a YouTube channel who've had the Gays against Groomers guy on, to support their findings? Very scientific, incredible standards of evidence.
When you dig into the review the more you find, the worse it is.
Did you know that of 3306 patients who went to GIDS, only 27% were referred for puberty blockers or hormone treatment.
That's after 6 appointments with GIDS. Hardly a massive prescription programme there, if 73% of patients never got to endocrinology.
Oh and of the 892 who did go to the endocrinologist, less than 10 chose to detransition. That's 1.92%. if you count it out of the 3306 patients the clinic saw in total that's 0.3%.
Don't believe me? It's here in the report itself.
So in FOUR YEARS and EIGHT MONTHS of patient data, they found less than 10 patients detransitioned out of 892 referred for endocrinology, 73% of patients were not referred and so never went onto puberty blockers or hormone treatment.
But the clinic is now closed and the treatment pathway is suspended. GIDS couldn't handle the patient load, but when they saw patients it wasn't a prescription free for all, there wasn't an automatic referral to endocrinology.
If you read the coverage it makes it seem like the consequence of 27% of young gender questioning people getting puberty blockers and then going onto hormones is a bad thing. It also makes it seem like there's an even balance between trans and detransition. The statistics in the damn report show that to be fundamentally untrue.
So 98.08% of patients referred to endocrinology were trans and were getting the healthcare they needed. And remember that group were 27% of 3306 patients, so 73% or 2204 patients were assessed as not requiring endocrinology at all.
Consider than GIDS had seen 9000 patients in total between 2009 and 2020. At 27% that would be around 2430 referred to endocrinology in that time. About 211 per year over 11 years.
The big concern about the gender identity clinics were that they couldn't cope with numbers. The issue about safety was the harm and risk the long waiting list would have on gender questioning youth.
That this has turned into taking away the treatment pathways that worked for 27% of them cannot be seen as a decision that's backed by the evidence the report contains, especially if you consider how the report dismissed so much research under extremely dubious grounds.
Tl: dr - Russ, eat a bag of wet sand and go for a swim. Consider yourself silenced by the trans lobby you nobber.
Last edited:
Rob Ray
Weight is meaningless
Yes the All Powerful Trans Lobby is doing so well at shutting down people who disagree with them that they've achieved none of their objectives (and in fact have had previous victories rolled back), been monstered across every major media outlet for years on end, have been targeted by the ruling party with the leadership of the opposition pledging to do exactly the same, had the main social media platform they'd been using to put their point across bought out by a transphobe who then deisgnated "cis" as a hate word, failed to even shut up Glinner despite him being completely off the wall, saw a massive rise in hate crimes against trans people, couldn't get a concrete pledge to stop conversion therapy ffs ...
... wait what were we talking about?
Last edited:
I don't think this is an accurate description of the review in question.
Rob Ray
Weight is meaningless
I don't think you've justified your assertion. I can call you a liar and a bounder (not that I am), but generally people might ask why I think that.
Orang Utan
Psychick Worrier Ov Geyoor
I am baffled at why/how the public discourse on this issue has become so toxic, and resulted in a massive intensification of prejudice towards trans people.
Can’t find the tweet, but someone on Xitter recently pointed out that Coronation Street had a major character in it for 16 years, from 1998 to 2013, called Hayley Cropper, who happened to be a trans womans (though played by a cis woman). She wasn’t tragic and fucked up any more than other soap characters, which LGBT characters are often presented as. (though she was killed off, it wasn’t anything to do with her gender - her death was hotly debated in public discourse but only because it was part of a euthanasia talking point).
The media, and audiences, were broadly supportive, and she was a popular character.
Imagine the fuss if they introduced such a character now?
I also remember being told, in a Music GCSE lesson about how
Wendy Carlos used to be Walter Carlos, to general acceptance/indifference from my fellow classmates who didn’t seem to think it was such a big deal.
Can’t find the tweet, but someone on Xitter recently pointed out that Coronation Street had a major character in it for 16 years, from 1998 to 2013, called Hayley Cropper, who happened to be a trans womans (though played by a cis woman). She wasn’t tragic and fucked up any more than other soap characters, which LGBT characters are often presented as. (though she was killed off, it wasn’t anything to do with her gender - her death was hotly debated in public discourse but only because it was part of a euthanasia talking point).
The media, and audiences, were broadly supportive, and she was a popular character.
Imagine the fuss if they introduced such a character now?
I also remember being told, in a Music GCSE lesson about how
Wendy Carlos used to be Walter Carlos, to general acceptance/indifference from my fellow classmates who didn’t seem to think it was such a big deal.
Last edited:
ddraig
kicking against the pricks...
Cass gender care review disappointing, says trans man
Trans young people say they feel "disappointed" and "ignored" by the Cass review into gender care.
www.bbc.co.uk
'Not listened to'
Balbi
Hey, Dean Yager!
Ok, but that was a top line reason given for straight up discarding dozens of studies by Dame Hilary Cass in favour of saying that there wasn't enough evidence. Evidence which multiple non-British assessments have not discarded, which is why it's so notable.
I believe there have also been some longer term studies published in the last few years, which were also not included in the report.
It is a developing research field, but to disregard what research there is by setting a standard other care pathways would not meet if subjected to similar standards is curious to say the least.
Balbi
Hey, Dean Yager!
Here's where they set their line at 2022 meaning anything published since then doesn't count towards the study, but that there is further study and research available some of which supports the findings of other studies (which were discarded).
Some of the issues stem from there being small groups of people going through endocrinology treatment, and their reference to pre and post studies is because as Cass says herself that's how you do something where you can't blind a study.
Like I say, it's a developing field, but to pretend it's a field with nothing in it is a curious decisions.
Balbi
Hey, Dean Yager!
Sorry for the hat trick but the "lack of high quality evidence" for the treatment did prompt a good response from a trans friend of mine who said;
"So there's no high quality evidence these treatments work? Well apart from all the fucking trans and non-binary people - but maybe we're low quality"
In the body of this review it is acknowledged recent studies not featured in the review confirm that there is "moderate-quality evidence that hormone treatment may improve psychological health" (examples below of the included studies).
By the time they get to the conclusion they say there is "suggestive evidence from mainly pre–post studies that hormone treatment may improve psychological health" and by the time it gets to the Cass Review press release this becomes "of the 53 studies included in the review on the use of masculising and feminising hormones, only 1 was of sufficiently high quality, with little or inconsistent evidence on key outcomes, such as body satisfaction, psychosocial and cognitive outcomes, fertility, bone health and cardiametabolic effects".
So even based on the studies they did include there is still no acknowledgement that the evidence points to an improvement in psychological health anywhere in the Cass Review's summary and recommendations. In other words they ignored the evidence.
Balbi
Hey, Dean Yager!
Sorry I'll just put one more thing in here and then I'm done.
The York review had Tilly Langton on the team. They're also known as Trilby Langton which is amusing given she's chosen her name, but social transition is bad eh
Tilly Langton is part of a Gender Exploratory Therapy group, alongside some pro-conversion therapy folks. That is not a neutral position. No conflict of interest was registered on the York review at all.
No trans people, or equivalent providers, had a similar role in the review or the Cass Report: NHS Trust uses "Gender Exploratory" training materials promoting conversion therapy lobbyists
That was raised in this briefing: https://transactual.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/TransActual-Briefing-on-Cass-Review.pdf
A few
in there, especially around international evidence being disregarded.
Oh, one final note here. Buy ending puberty blocker prescription, and is the NHS restrict hormone prescriptions - that locks every trans woman out of a whole range of sports forever.
A lot of the guidelines that don't outright ban trans women allow them access if they have not gone through male puberty.
There's no way for them to do that now and that means trans women out of a range of sports entirely, enforced by the NHS.
The York review had Tilly Langton on the team. They're also known as Trilby Langton which is amusing given she's chosen her name, but social transition is bad eh
Tilly Langton is part of a Gender Exploratory Therapy group, alongside some pro-conversion therapy folks. That is not a neutral position. No conflict of interest was registered on the York review at all.
No trans people, or equivalent providers, had a similar role in the review or the Cass Report: NHS Trust uses "Gender Exploratory" training materials promoting conversion therapy lobbyists
That was raised in this briefing: https://transactual.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/TransActual-Briefing-on-Cass-Review.pdf
A few
in there, especially around international evidence being disregarded.Oh, one final note here. Buy ending puberty blocker prescription, and is the NHS restrict hormone prescriptions - that locks every trans woman out of a whole range of sports forever.
A lot of the guidelines that don't outright ban trans women allow them access if they have not gone through male puberty.
There's no way for them to do that now and that means trans women out of a range of sports entirely, enforced by the NHS.
Last edited:
Similar threads
