Treatments for trans children and politics, world-wide

[TrackerNeil]

Looks like the Cass Review might have had an impact on the NHS, at least.

[DMC]

32 minutes ago, TrackerNeil said:

Looks like the Cass Review might have had an impact on the NHS, at least.

I mean, they commissioned the report…

[Heartofice]

3 minutes ago, DMC said:

I mean, they commissioned the report…

What are you suggesting?

[mormont]

38 minutes ago, TrackerNeil said:

Looks like the Cass Review might have had an impact on the NHS, at least.

The Cass review said nothing about this topic. The common thread here isn't the Cass review: it's the toxic and relentless anti-trans prejudice that has created pressure on public services for trans folks.

[DMC]

2 minutes ago, Heartofice said:

What are you suggesting?

It’s not surprising the NHS reacted to a report they commissioned.

[Heartofice]

6 minutes ago, mormont said:

anti-trans

Is someone who wants a female-only ward 'anti trans'?

[Which Tyler]

No.

Thinking that trans women aren't women is anti-trans.

 

But I'm pretty sure you knew that, whether you agree or not.

[Heartofice]

4 minutes ago, Which Tyler said:

No.

Thinking that trans women aren't women is anti-trans.

 

But I'm pretty sure you knew that, whether you agree or not.

Actually I would disagree. As I mentioned in my post on the previous page.

[Conflicting Thought]

16 minutes ago, Heartofice said:

Actually I would disagree. As I mentioned in my post on the previous page.

Oh what a shocker

[Heartofice]

1 minute ago, Conflicting Thought said:

Oh what a shocker

I outlined my thoughts here:

If you have anything more productive to say, feel free.

[Conflicting Thought]

2 hours ago, TrackerNeil said:

Looks like the Cass Review might have had an impact on the NHS, at least.

And do you like that?

 

Maya Forstater, of the Sex Matters campaign group, said the changes were "excellent news".

 

"The confusion between 'sex' and 'gender' in official policies like the NHS Constitution is what has enabled women's rights to be trampled over in the name of transgender identities," she said.

Such wonderfull people, full of empathy and genuine care for trans people

[DaveSumm]

It’s hard to convey just how damaging these ridiculous language games are. “Trans women are women” just comes across as “you’re using our definition now or you’re a transphobe” to those who don’t understand where you’re coming from. I’ve had numerous friends and family tell me this. There is not wide agreement on the terms gender, man, or woman. And to a lesser extent, male and female. This will not be magicked away overnight by forcing people to use your words, not their own.

Which is why these discussions are always fruitless, each side just agrees to misunderstand the other almost willfully. It’s a weird hill that people seem to meet on just to have a fight. 

[TrackerNeil]

17 minutes ago, Conflicting Thought said:

And do you like that?

I'm honestly not sure. These are difficult questions, because I think that, often, there is no "right" answer. We're balancing the interests of one group against the interests of another. For example, I don't want someone refusing care from a trans doctor because that patient just doesn't like trans people--that's not a good reason to request a new doctor. That said, there are religions that require strict separation between the sexes, and that seems like a somewhat better reason for concern. Even  leaving religion aside, there are other reasons one might specify the sex of a doctor, like women who prefer a female gynecologist, which seems perfectly reasonable to me. I don't think anyone is going to find a hard-and-fast rule that satisfies everyone; we as a society are going to have to ask difficult questions and accept that the answers may be non-perfect but the best that can be done.

Thanks for the question. I hope I have answered it.

Edited May 1 by TrackerNeil

[BigFatCoward]

55 minutes ago, Which Tyler said:

No.

Thinking that trans women aren't women is anti-trans.

 

Being anti trans probably means you think trans women aren't women, I'm not sure how the reverse is factually accurate.  

Edited May 1 by BigFatCoward

[Kalbear]

4 hours ago, TrackerNeil said:

Looks like the Cass Review might have had an impact on the NHS, at least.

It's really remarkable the logical jumps folks are going through here because they got the result they wanted. @mormont pointed this out too, but not to the degree I'm about to.

The Cass report was primarily focused on discussing the overuse of certain medical treatments on minors and how the use of those treatments did not appear to be largely based on evidentiary results, right? We can agree on that? 

So how on earth does it make sense to any of you that the NHS, upon reading this, is changing their policy so that people can now request a specific person of a certain biological sex for treatment and will change how people are kept in different wards? What does that have to do with puberty blockers efficacy or treatment of minors at all? 

It'd be like issuing a report saying that antidepressants were overprescribed in kids and as a result we're going to make sure that you don't have to be in a room with a depressed person. 

[Heartofice]

1 minute ago, Kalbear said:

It's really remarkable the logical jumps folks are going through here because they got the result they wanted. @mormont pointed this out too, but not to the degree I'm about to.

The Cass report was primarily focused on discussing the overuse of certain medical treatments on minors and how the use of those treatments did not appear to be largely based on evidentiary results, right? We can agree on that? 

So how on earth does it make sense to any of you that the NHS, upon reading this, is changing their policy so that people can now request a specific person of a certain biological sex for treatment and will change how people are kept in different wards? What does that have to do with puberty blockers efficacy or treatment of minors at all? 

It'd be like issuing a report saying that antidepressants were overprescribed in kids and as a result we're going to make sure that you don't have to be in a room with a depressed person. 

What you are missing is that the Cas report has meant that a sensible discussion on the topic can happen out in the open without malicious accusations of ‘transphobia’.
 

The report itself exposed some of the poorly thought out policies in place regarding gender, which has led to other poorly thought out policies to fixed as well.

Not sure it’s hard to understand. 

[Kalbear]

2 hours ago, DaveSumm said:

It’s hard to convey just how damaging these ridiculous language games are. “Trans women are women” just comes across as “you’re using our definition now or you’re a transphobe” to those who don’t understand where you’re coming from. I’ve had numerous friends and family tell me this. There is not wide agreement on the terms gender, man, or woman. And to a lesser extent, male and female. This will not be magicked away overnight by forcing people to use your words, not their own.

Which is why these discussions are always fruitless, each side just agrees to misunderstand the other almost willfully. It’s a weird hill that people seem to meet on just to have a fight. 

It's even harder to convey how weird it is to think that a person who has been medically diagnosed with gender dysphoria, who then gets treatment and surgery to effectively change their biological sex, who identifies directly with exactly one of the two sexes and wants to be given the same considerations as any other person of that sex is somehow confusing to people who think that they want...something different. 

I mean, this doesn't seem like a 'ridiculous language game'. This is a person that wanted to change from one sex to the other. This doesn't require wide agreement on gender or spectrums or anything else; this is literally someone needing, medically, to go from one sex to the other. 

I do agree that you appear to be willfully attempting to misunderstand the other side quite heavily and mischaracterize that viewpoint willfully. 

[Kalbear]

Just now, Heartofice said:

What you are missing is that the Cas report has meant that a sensible discussion on the topic can happen out in the open without malicious accusations of ‘transphobia’.

The report itself exposed some of the poorly thought out policies in place regarding gender, which has led to other poorly thought out policies to fixed as well.

Not sure it’s hard to understand. 

So you're in favor of reports on issues of medical malfeasance making changes to general policies that have nothing to do with that medical malfeasance? 

That's how you want to address policy issues - by doing studies on something unrelated and then making a decision? And this is what you want from your democratically elected representatives? 

I wonder how angry you'd be if someone did a study on the mistreatment of minors in the immigration system and used that to reduce the restrictions on immigration in general. 

[Heartofice]

5 minutes ago, Kalbear said:

So you're in favor of reports on issues of medical malfeasance making changes to general policies that have nothing to do with that medical malfeasance? 

That's how you want to address policy issues - by doing studies on something unrelated and then making a decision? And this is what you want from your democratically elected representatives? 

I wonder how angry you'd be if someone did a study on the mistreatment of minors in the immigration system and used that to reduce the restrictions on immigration in general. 

You are missing the point I am making. I am not saying the Cass report directly caused the new changes within the NHS, but indirectly, by highlighting the approach to gender within the NHS over the past few years. It has also helped to remove many of the barriers to talking about the topic, and exposed some of the poor thinking in general on the topic. 

This has led to the NHS re-examining some of it's other policies and maybe taking a wider, I'd say more sensible, view as to what actions they should take.

[Heartofice]

13 minutes ago, Kalbear said:

It's even harder to convey how weird it is to think that a person who has been medically diagnosed with gender dysphoria, who then gets treatment and surgery to effectively change their biological sex, who identifies directly with exactly one of the two sexes and wants to be given the same considerations as any other person of that sex is somehow confusing to people who think that they want...something different. 

I mean, this doesn't seem like a 'ridiculous language game'. This is a person that wanted to change from one sex to the other. This doesn't require wide agreement on gender or spectrums or anything else; this is literally someone needing, medically, to go from one sex to the other. 

I do agree that you appear to be willfully attempting to misunderstand the other side quite heavily and mischaracterize that viewpoint willfully. 

The difference is that some people would say it's perfectly possible to treat someone as the gender in which they identify whilst also recognising that biological sex exists.