Roe v Wade

[pineapple stu]

That is my reading of the Keira Bell case, where she claimed in the High Court (and won) that the NHS "should have challenged her more over her transition". She underwent a double masectomy and other surgery as a result.

If I'm wrong in my conclusion, then I've no problems discussing and/or acknowledging that.

Is it an edge case? The David Bell whistle-blowing report and the Keira Bell case led to the Cass Report, and I've previously quoted the section in it where the same mindset is evidenced from other patients (the idea that they felt there was no way out of transitioning once they had been diagnosed). The Keira Bell case may be the worst case scenario from this mindset, but I don't believe that undermines the case in any way. Bell herself (in the same link) says "What happened to me is happening across the Western world".

And of course none of that is in any way an objection to proper evidence-based treatment for such cases.

But if you want to choose not to engage, then I absolutely respect that decision.

[tetsujin1979]

Well, technically that's exactly what this case is about. (I think it originated as a test case in Scotland to see whether a male identifying as a female could count as a female on a board with quotas)

It's led to trans people not being able to exist as who they are.

Are they male? Sounds fair if so. Bear in mind the ruling is almost certainly going to end the practice of males-identifying-as-females ending up in female prisons, which is more of a danger to female inmates than a safety to the prisoner.

Then that's what should have been addressed, not this blanket ban

Drag queen readings to young kids, to be clear. I'm quite ok with that not being a thing to be honest.

For the record, as long as everyone present is properly vetted, I've no problem with anyone reading/training/etc with children.

But you can't really use that to argue against what's happening here. They're two completely separate things. I'm completely against homosexuality being outlawed here, for example. If that happens, I'll argue against it as much as I've argued for the Cass Report, etc, here.

We're unlikely to see something as blunt as "homosexuality is illegal", but it'll be death by a thousand cuts to the culture, e.g. banning pride marches in Hungary

ut here's the thing - it's a separate point. Completely separate. You can't argue against Point A by saying "Yeah, well Point B might happen at some stage".

I don't see it as a separate thing, as evidenced by posting the comic strip. It's the same fight.
BTW some of the people who were campaigning for the legal definition of women have moved on to protesting immigration. Wonder how the immigrants/second gen people that joined them in the campaign feel about it.

nd not once in your posts have you addressed the real issues here - people being mis-diagnosed, being badly advised from a medical point of view and given unnecessary invasive surgery, etc, etc. And in fact, to the litany of disgraceful things that have happened in the name of this cause in the past few years, you can add the link between puberty blockers and cancer and infertility, particularly in males. None of this was explained of course - in fact, so far as I'm aware it wasn't even tracked.

I don't know enough about the case to discuss it

[pineapple stu]

It's led to trans people not being able to exist as who they are.

In what way?

And to be clear, I don't believe I can simply identify as female and have the right to enter female spaces as a result, even if that means I don't get to exist as I am. I think that's the central part of the Supreme Court ruling.

For the record, as long as everyone present is properly vetted, I've no problem with anyone reading/training/etc with children.

OK - I don't think children should be exposed to overt sexualisation at such a young age. These are two different views - but neither are relevant to trans issues as far as I can see.

but it'll be death by a thousand cuts to the culture

I don't think that fear has any real basis in reality though. There'll always be cultures that are less tolerant than others (and ironically, DEI calls for us to be inclusive of these) but I genuinely don't see it being an issue here. There's likely an element of extreme over-reaction, and if some of the sillier trans policies were rowed back on (in UCD for example, there's signs on the toilets saying "Please use the toilets corresponding to the gender you feel most comfortable with", which is silly - as indeed Crafty has shown with his real-world example, which to me shows that the argument for trans rights can often be at the expense of the rights of others) and if people were accepting of that fact, then the counter-reaction would also die down.

I don't see it as a separate thing, as evidenced by posting the comic strip. It's the same fight.

I don't agree. They're two very separate issues. Do you not think that you can be supportive of homosexuality while at the same time have issues over the very real concerns that have arisen in trans treatment, etc? Your cartoon would argue that you can't. It argues that anyone who opposes the more liberal interpretations of trans is almost de facto homophobic too. That's why I think it's too simplistic to be helpful in a debate like this.

I don't know enough about the case to discuss it

Have a read of them (plural - there's more than one case). I've provided plenty of links.

[John83]

This would be the ruling that makes it simultaneously a requirement that transmen use the toilet of their birth gender (women's toilets) and simultaneously allows transmen to be banned from women's toilets for being too masculine? That ruling? I suppose it's unreasonably tolerant to expect those people to have somewhere to ****. There are already morons in the US who are obsessed with accusing women of being transwomen on spurious grounds, very often incorrectly. This leads to incidents like the one I linked earlier, where a woman was harassed by police in a public toilet.

Morton said that when she exited the bathroom stall, she lifted her shirt to prove to the deputies that she was a woman. But, she said, one of the deputies continued to insist she “looked like a man.”

But the really, really telling thing for me is that in a Roe v Wade thread, there's now almost twice as much on this trans topic as on the thread topic, which ruling has seen previously very stable maternal death rates up 27% in just a few years. It's the greatest political cat toy I've ever seen.

[The Fly]

But the really, really telling thing for me is that in a Roe v Wade thread, there's now almost twice as much on this trans topic as on the thread topic, which ruling has seen previously very stable maternal death rates up 27% in just a few years. It's the greatest political cat toy I've ever seen.

What I find really, really surprising is that the trans content hasn't been removed and put into a separate thread.

[John83]

You'll have to ask the mod.

[SkStu]

Is there no women’s thread it can be amalgamated with?

[CraftyToePoke]

Is there no women’s thread it can be amalgamated with?

The WNT one on the main board MNT section.

[pineapple stu]

This would be the ruling that makes it simultaneously a requirement that transmen use the toilet of their birth gender (women's toilets) and simultaneously allows transmen to be banned from women's toilets for being too masculine? That ruling? I suppose it's unreasonably tolerant to expect those people to have somewhere to ****. There are already morons in the US who are obsessed with accusing women of being transwomen on spurious grounds, very often incorrectly. This leads to incidents like the one I linked earlier, where a woman was harassed by police in a public toilet.


But the really, really telling thing for me is that in a Roe v Wade thread, there's now almost twice as much on this trans topic as on the thread topic, which ruling has seen previously very stable maternal death rates up 27% in just a few years. It's the greatest political cat toy I've ever seen.

I think part of the argument here is we need to ignore what morons in the US are doing - and possibly the language/cultural ties make that harder than we realise. Other countries (the Nordics for example) quietly moved away from WPATH advice years ago. America seems a messed up place culturally (and its police doubly so) and I don't think anyone is arguing we follow what they're doing. In fact, quite the opposite I would say. There more than one way to skin a cat.

I don't mind the thread being split. I think there's general agreement the Roe v Wade decision (and indeed US healthcare in general) is just wrong and that doesn't make for productive debate. It's also not relevant in Ireland so there's probably less interest from that point of view too.

I don't think it's reasonable to dismiss this as a cat toy. Anyone with an interest in trans health should be really concerned by the issues with WPATH and those raised in the Cass Report - and again, can be really concerned about other things too. The problem is the debate polarises for some reason. Partly I think because of a lack of engagement with the other side of the debate (which happens on both sides, generally). Nobody's acknowledged Crafty's real-life experience (there's a better way of phrasing that I think) for example. Heck, nobody seems to have acknowledged the Cass Report raises serious medical questions. I think if that were to change, there'd be a much stronger debate.

[dahamsta]

But if you want to choose not to engage, then I absolutely respect that decision.

I'm not pstu, because while I generally have great respect for you, on this particular topic I consider some of your comments homophobic and anti-trans on a level not far off the likes of the MAGA posters in this forum, deliberate misunderstanding and misuse of facts and science, which again I think it beneath you. Your comments about drag queens in schools just cemented this, a viewpoint I find almost tragic. I'll leave it at that.

[The Fly]

You'll have to ask the mod.

It was said in jest, with a nod and a wink to the standards in the Ireland section.

[osarusan]

What I find really, really surprising is that the trans content hasn't been removed and put into a separate thread.

Seemingly, this was meant in jest to some extent, but I'd be happy if the trans discussion was indeed moved into its own thread, leaving the abortion discussion to its own thread.

[dahamsta]

I'm happy to split out this discussion, I just couldn't find a suitable cutoff point the last time I was here, and I'm up the walls. Anyone care to give me a post number?

[John83]

53 is the first trans post I think.

[Real ale Madrid]

But the really, really telling thing for me is that in a Roe v Wade thread, there's now almost twice as much on this trans topic as on the thread topic, which ruling has seen previously very stable maternal death rates up 27% in just a few years. It's the greatest political cat toy I've ever seen.

Good to see you've changed your tune anyway.

I don't think it adds much to a debate to argue over which of two bad things is worse. We can agree that they're bad. It's not a competition. It's little more than a nasty little rhetorical trap, and anyone who brings up such comparisons should take a good hard look at themselves.

[Real ale Madrid]

It's led to trans people not being able to exist as who they are.

Gender dysphoria is a mental illness according to some, so if trans people are by definition mentally ill, there's no way you can have a reasonable debate on this issue imo. I've learned this the hard way.

[pineapple stu]

I'm not pstu, because while I generally have great respect for you, on this particular topic I consider some of your comments homophobic and anti-trans on a level not far off the likes of the MAGA posters in this forum, deliberate misunderstanding and misuse of facts and science, which again I think it beneath you. Your comments about drag queens in schools just cemented this, a viewpoint I find almost tragic. I'll leave it at that.

I mean, again, while I will reciprocate that I generally have had great respect for your views down the years, you've not really put anything in that post I can really argue against. It is somewhat an "Attack the post, not the poster" sort of post. And I'm genuinely surprised that the tipping point seems to be the issue of drag queen story hour, which isn't a trans issue at all.

[John83]

Good to see you've changed your tune anyway.

The first was to say there was no reason to derail the thread, and the second was a criticism of how the thread was derailed. But sure, take them out of context if it suits your purposes.

[Real ale Madrid]

The first was to say there was no reason to derail the thread, and the second was a criticism of how the thread was derailed. But sure, take them out of context if it suits your purposes.

Nah - we were both making the same point. I've taken nothing out of context and whole-heartedly agree with your observation and what you've taken from the discussion re. the trans discussion v what the thread was originally about. That was the exact point I was making when referencing hate crimes against the transgender's community. Nobody cares about that either.