Comments by "Robert Marshall" (@robertmarshall2502) on "What do the Trans community need most right now? Abigail Thorn u0026 Freddy McConnell | Pod Save The UK" video.

  1. ​ @triciaamheiser785  It's ludicrous to say that trans rights are no threat to women's rights. Across the West women and children have lost access to single-sex female spaces like prisons, sports, r crisis centres, changing rooms etc. The ideas put forward by the trans community let any male in and yet none of you acknowledge the clear and obvious issues with that. If you can't see that then look up the crime rates amongst "trans women" prisoners. Please note the quotes are mine but trans ideology determines that we can't question their gender identity choices. Trans is not the new gay. If anything it's been traditionally used to suppress gay ppl and that still occurs in the modern world. But the community never talks about that.
    16
  2.  @foop9  It's ludicrous that people are claiming nothing has happened that affects women and children's rights. Most of the people watching are likely from the UK where we had 7 r---s by 6 "trans women" (and given how s offences work likely far higher) in a 4 year period in the Scottish women's prison. Compared to zero by any female prisoner. We've had a bunch of high profile attacks on children by trans identifying males using their access to women and children, although to be fair sometimes the news stories didn't mention they were male. There was a woman on an NHS ward r---ed by a male and the police told her it was impossible because it was a female only ward. I mean New Zealand has more 3x "trans women" s offenders than women s offenders ffs In Ireland there is a "Barbie Kardashian" who spends every day threatening to r--- the female prison guards
    7
  3. There is a study of female prisoners in the Scottish system: "She Was Just Like A Lassie’: Analysing The Views of Cis-Women In Custody About Their Experiences of Living With Transgender Women In The Scottish Prison Estate Matthew Maycock (The title is laughably out of sync with the detail). It unsurprisingly backs up your position clearly. They complain about how "trans women" revert to being men on the outside and others note that they were advising s offenders to pretend to be women to get into the female estate. We also have freedom of information requests across the anglosphere showing that "trans women" commit far more crimes proportionally and in particular as offences. The problem is that their ideology neither let's them say, a lot of these are just predatory males, nor accept that "true trans" males are still a danger to women and children. It makes conversations very difficult. And apparently they're "moderating" the comments here a lot.
    7
  4. ​ @braveblade You're not alone. Judith Butler's world view is so inconsistent with the reality we've lived through. Her view of gender doesn't fit any of the historical societies I've studied. I've read a few different definitions of gender and I still think it fits better as a word used within a specific society to explain social and cultural norms and roles connected to a specific sex. I can make it to understanding third genders but can't really fit them in a definition. They fit better as a sub-section of a sex class, for example they're almost always males who are considered incapable of being "men". The problem you then have is that these guys essentially use gender to mean gender identity which means identity. And then you get where clearly they're identifying with gender norms, ie old fashioned sexist stereotypes, which makes them sexist or they're identifying with something entirely individual which means no one else should really have an obligation to them because it's essentially a belief system. Either way I find few trans identifying ppl have a good grip on what they mean by gender. They will repeat mantras but not explore them very deeply in my experience. By their definitions my "gender identity" often changes depending on who I'm talking to.
    4
  5.  @msremnant5576  Count the number of reproductive pathways we have: 1-ovaries 2-sperm The end. Every single "intersex" person falls into one of two categories: 1 female 2 male Also we can see that these differences do affect our lives. Males can get affected by prostate cancer, Females get menopause. If you want the clearest example then just compare the criminality of trans women and trans men. Unsurprisingly those who are female commit far fewer crimes. BTW the evidence you want about number non-binary is in the Cass Report among other places. If you want to prove that trans is not based on stereotypes please explain in what way you are the gender you say you are.
    4
  6.  @itcouldbelupus2842  You claimed a load of bs about 98% discard rate. All your claims can be directly disproven by either looking at the Cass report itself which explains in detail a methodology that doesn't do that or from the studies from the University of York. The fact that studies which are not double blind are worse than those that are can't be disputed. You can't just declare a low quality study (not one of which you've named as something they should have taken into account and shown they discarded) as high quality because you agree with the supposed findings. Every single systematic review has repeatedly shown that the evidence base for affirmative care is remarkably poor. You can't dispute this so you don't
    4
  7.  @classycolas  In Canada a girl got prescribed testosterone age 14 in 9 mins in her first appointment. The doctor never mentioned side effects. Parents weren't present. Girl mentioned she had an eating disorder and got the idea from a YouTube video. The doctor talked about surgery in the first 5 mins. They follow Wpath in Canada.
    3
  8.  @paulhammond6978  I edited my comment after reading the essay. Have you read the Cass Review? Have you read the methodological process? Have you read similar reviews of evidence and how they follow a similar process? The "pedantry" is the standard process. You'd have to have an issue with literally every systematic review of evidence ever done. Except ones done spectacularly poorly and that include anything and everything regardless of how badly it was done or flawed it is. You grade the evidence and then give it higher or lower importance based on how sure we can be of its accuracy. It is also literally explained in the Cass report that having very high evidence for everything is not common in systematic reviews. The fact that much of the evidence we have is of low quality is not something that can be disputed. We have a real lack of evidence and that has been shown in every single systematic review across multiple countries. It is noteworthy that those in favour of affirmative care are consistently opposed to getting more evidence, displaying a clear lack of faith in their view. The other issue is the assumption that the low quality evidence would therefore all be in favour of affirmative care. This is a bizarre position because it subconsciously reveals the knowledge that the evidence base for affirmative care is very weak but also you can go look at the list of studies and check them out for yourself and you can see that some are "positive", some "negative" and many more basically "neutral" or inconclusive or flawed. That's what got excluded. You can include them if you like and you'll get more of an "We have no idea" position. Which would result in us not having any affirmative care except under extreme clinical conditions. Which might not be ethically possible, certainly not for children. If you're familiar with the studies then you'd realise including those studies does not produce a significantly "better" report for those who are pro-affirmative care. This is why none of those saying, they didn't include studies give zero examples. If they gave one then you'd see cherry-picking and we'd be able to discuss how, why yes, this is of low quality.
    3
  9. I believe that's what Stonewall were telling everyone it meant but it clearly isn't what it meant. It's clearly connected to surgical intervention. By your definition everyone has access to all single-sex spaces which means single-sex spaces cease to exist. Do you not see any clear and obvious issues with self-id policies?
    3
  10. Unfortunately all the best available evidence shows that long term this route has awful outcomes.
    3
  11. I agree it was a loud call to fascism
    3
  12. They invite them all the time but they almost never turn up. It's part of the problem of #nodebate. You should also notice that the far left also pretty much only invites the males although there are now more female trans ppl
    3
  13.  @rachelbayston5007  I've literally provided sources across this video and no one reads them. Look up Stephen Levine Current Concerns about affirmative care if you like. Or wings over Scotland rorschach test if you prefer Or the Wpath files Or the Swedish systematic review of evidence Or the Finnish one Or the British one.. Oh wait that's the Cass review itself that you won't read Mate you can't just ask vaguely for sources. I've read 100s of studies on this topic. I need at least a ball park idea of what you want
    3
  14.  @upnorth2421  Is it just me or are you also disappointed with the inability of these guys to form coherent opinions? So far I can just people who lie and then pretend others are lying? Btw in the UK according to the BBC "Sexual assaults are actually increasing, affecting just over 4% of women aged 16 to 59 in the year to March 2023, a figure that has nearly doubled since 2014." Which also coincides with the claims about self-id laws affecting no one, according to trans activists on this very channel since 2010.
    3
  15.  @itcouldbelupus2842  None of which has anything to do with the University of York carrying out the studies. Wpath has links with John Money and the Eunuch Archive
    3
  16.  @autumnjacaranda106  a) We don't know that puberty=lifelong suffering. The evidence seems to suggest the opposite. b) Puberty and maturity in general is strongly provably connected to alleviation of gender dysphoria c) How do you decide which "trans kid" will grow up identifying as a trans adult? d) How do you decide which "trans kid" will grow up wishing they'd not gone through puberty and had a lower cognitive ability as a result? e) Clearly it isn't the same. A medical intervention with numerous side effects (and probably more we don't yet know) and prevents healthy progress is not similar to a natural process in the stage of mammals which gives you better cognitive ability, makes you stronger and less vulnerable and allows you sexual impulse. I can only guess people with your opinion don't think very deeply.
    3
  17.  @darrens3  "NHS doctors have said its complete nonsense". Yes these unnamed NHS doctors. Meanwhile NHS England and Scotland, who I think have the odd doctor, seem to disagree. So does Finland, Norway, Sweden, oh everywhere where they did systematic reviews. Incidentally the places with the best available evidence. I seriously doubt you've read it. Aside form your appeals to authority what specifically is wrong in the report? Have you not noticed that not one of you mentions a fault with the actual stats or findings?
    2
  18. Oh BTW I will read through the trans actual ideas about the Cass Review when I have time but there are immediate obvious false claims in the summary such as it dismissing almost all evidence. A claim literally shown as false in your interview. The first footnote cited are someone's tweets... There is no part of the Cass Review that says being trans is an undesirable outcome. It would also be interesting for these guys to hold other, clearly far weaker, studies and reports to the same standards. But clearly they don't because they support the supposed conclusions. Edit: I've now read it. It is ludicrous. Many claims have zero footnotes and sources and are outlandish opinions. Others involve circular reporting with other "pro-trans" articles which actually disprove the claim! They also blame the Cass Report for things like staffing of GIDS which is clearly not its role. The tweets from the neuroscientist talk about waiting until you are physically able to reproduce, something which logically would rule out puberty blockers. This is ignored as it is being used to counter a spurious alarmist claim about under 25s that isn't in the report. The claim that trans people were barred from being on the panel goes unevidenced and unexplained.(I'd be really interested to know what this means and why they say it?) It disingenuously makes it seem like only 2/103 studies were used instead of the majority. It doesn't explain that ruling out very low quality studies is standard practice in a systematic review and how you get a higher quality overall picture. It also assumes that those excluded would show only one view which is categorically false. All of this can be literally seen for yourself by reading. There are long explanations of precisely how this process was undertaken which took multiple steps. Frankly this presentation is simply lying and wilfully presenting what it knows is a false version of events. It doesn't question why 5/6 adult gender clinics didn't provide info and instead finds a problem with us having more details with a spurious claim of privacy. They weren't interested in naming people but analysing data, obviously. The footnote actually shows that the opinion presented is false. The only ethical concern (the rest weren't ethical ones and sound like excuses for them not following up correctly something they should do for the benefit of their patients) was allowing people to have an "opt out" which, while it would be better to have all the data and some data could be provided without affecting personal privacy (overall numbers, ages etc.), I see no issue with letting people know and giving them the option. There's a claim about graphs which is literally explained in the same section. It puts "exponentially" in quotes as if this can be mathematically disputed. It can't for the period they are referring to. It explains how later years we can be less certain of data for in the report. Then this essay presents that info without caveats to present a biased view, something it just accused the report of doing but which it didn't. It disputes the blatantly obvious truth that most of the evidence we have for people of third or transgender in History demonstrates they were overwhelmingly male. Claiming, lol, that no evidence exists. If that is true then no one can claim that trans people have always existed! This is not a disputed idea amongst historians of third gender. One of the criticisms is that puberty blockers don't help gender dysphoria, this essay agrees with that but doesn't seem to understand that some people claim they do help with this and with mental health. This is in the section about inconsistencies and yet is laughably inconsistent with the view of the writer. (lol just came back to this, it literally does it itself after! It successfully says, no one does x and then does x in the same document!) It again falsely equates the good idea of following up with 18-25s automatically and not just making them reapply to adults services as if they automatically will end all care for this group. If someone is partway through transition why is it better to have them drop off one service and reapply to another and have to go through another waiting list? This is clearly designed to make young trans ppl fearful, which is disgusting. Claims that reasons for mental health screening being needed aren't explained when there are literally pages and pages of reasons given why such a holistic approach makes sense. The only way it doesn't make sense is if you think these are cosmetic procedures rather than aimed at helping people. The former would not be part of the NHS. Even then mental health screening of some sort should be standard for cosmetic procedures. Lots more claims that are literally explained in the document. Does the writer have a literacy issue? It blames the view that kids should take longer to explore options on detransitioners when clearly this is also a reasonably common view amongst trans people. Particularly older trans ppl. Clearly misunderstands this view due to black and white, either you're with us or against us, thinking. It might look at what we know about fertility regret from older trans ppl for example. Complains about not dealing with problems of going through puberty just after highlighting that puberty blockers have no positive effects on body image compared to those who go through it. Absolutely brain dead. Highlights surgeries with basically no studies behind them after complaining about lack of good evidence which it also criticised the report for not including bad evidence. Complete hypocrisy. The summary at the end doesn't match the "executive summary" which was a bunch of rambling hysterical nonsense. I can't actually find how most of the stuff in the "executive summary" relates to the details provided. Where did they show it was "fundamentally flawed" for example? I expected this to come up but actually they couldn't attack about 90% of the actual report so they just plain ignored it and said, please, whatever you do, don't read this.
    2
  19. I think claiming that third party groups are not teaching gender identity in schools is silly. Particularly when you also simultaneously claim that they should be taught this and also this is not "contested". We've all heard of the likes of mermaids, the gengerbread man, the gender unicorn, there are parents who've shared some of the inappropriate resources from third party groups who also advertise sex shops on the same website. Sex is not "assigned" in the UK. It's also clearly objective to say there are two sexes. Take that away and trans ppl cease to exist conceptually. I'm sorry did he just claim to have changed sex?! Absolutely ludicrous. This version of gender dysphoria outlined, while at least personal, clearly negates all claims that we need any medical intervention for trans ppl. Logically you'd argue against "affirmative care" if you held this view. Claiming that the NHS is putting a clinical label on it but only when trans ppl have it is objectively false. Waiting lists are clearly linked to the 100x increase in ppl identifying as trans and being diagnosed with gender dysphoria. It's also obvious that if you don't think gender dysphoria should be pathologized then there should be no appointments whatsoever. The claim of coroner reports is wildly false. All the available evidence suggests "affirmative care" has no impact on this if I'm being kind and exacerbates it if I'm being more accurate. Its noticeable that there is no objective criticism of this trans identified male because he identifies as trans. Clearly no journalistic integrity when you don't apply the same standards to everyone. The "informed consent" model is the least studied and most speculative one which also appears to have the worst long term results. It's also clear from the Cass review and Wpath files that the patients are not being fully informed and clearly children simply can't be fully informed. This route is being used on non-verbal autistic children. Children need to go through puberty in order to gain the cognitive ability to do so. It's clearly not possible for them to consent to future lack of fertility or possible lack of sexual sensation or development when they have no idea what that means in real terms. Also the "informed consent" route is clearly not about medical intervention but personal aesthetic choice and therefore can't be expected to produce positive mental health outcomes. Medicine is not, give the patient what they want. Clear correlations with chopping off limbs. Comparing the menopause to what trans ppl go through is disingenuous and frankly misogynistic. The ones going through menopause are the teen girls being put on testosterone. Clearly no "cis" male or female is able to say I have x symptoms and get hormone replacement therapy. They have to be a menopausal woman. BTW there's a lot of evidence we overprescribe those drugs but also women aren't getting them because of the exponential growth in adult males taking them. "Conversion therapists" another extremist purposefully disingenuous claim goes by completely unchallenged. Wpath's guidance is obviously not best practice and so has been abandoned by all countries that do systematic reviews of the evidence. The Cass review showed its level of scientific rigour to be frankly pathetic. The trans identified actually entirely disagrees with it in large parts. It would have been interesting to explore which parts they all agree with, transition of non-verbal autistic children? Transition of ppl with the pseudoscience of "multiple personalities"? Eunuchs based on a website where they fantasize about castrating young boys? Completely unstudied "non-binary" surgeries? The initial age limits removed without reason given after trans activist pressure? What about the Wpath files which contradict what they say publicly? Or the fact they just decided to call themselves the World's Professional organization with no real evidence why they are having been based on a verifiable quack's original ideas? The issues we had at the Tavistock are directly linked to the Dutch protocol and Wpath guidance. Claiming they ignored it is ludicrous. We tried it. It was terrible, to the point we have a study showing negative mental health outcomes. There is absolutely zero evidence of the NHS openly practicing "conversion therapy" in the sense quoted. Blatant lie again. Unless you mean that almost all of those transitioned are same sex attracted. Some wild conspiracy therapies about personal vendettas. Ludicrous to complain about lack of evidence when literally none has been presented in this whole discussion. Calling them ideologues is also incredible. The nonsense of why not abortion why not IVF is ridiculous. You're comparing your desire to transition as if it's a right. False claims of not wanting ppl to exist. If you want Nish we could teach kids of the horrible misogynistic homophobic history of third gender societies. Oh, no, you don't. "Biological women" comes from you guys falsely eroding the objective reality of being female. No investigation of what happens when you end single-sex female spaces. Misogyny. "No evidence it harms anyone". Except the justice systems in every single Western country. Or the access to sport. Utterly ludicrous claim. Particularly from a country where a victim of r was gaslit after being told there were no men on her female only ward and therefore she wasn't a victim. It ends the existence of single-sex female rights. How can that possibly not have an effect?! BTW we've also had trans identifying females die in hospitals because the details of sex are obscured so trans ppl don't get adequate care. Basically said anyone who proved me wrong is spreading misinformation. We all know what happened in the Scottish women's prison. You can't just pretend it didn't. Why would anyone think Mermaids are worth listening to? You can't just claim that ppl are members of "pro conversion therapy" when clearly not one has ever said they are pro conversion therapy. What you're actually saying is that you're against basic mental health and offering holistic therapy for distress. The review also used the University of York which has an excellent reputation and you can't claim they're all biased. The review is based on the data found. Sorry but the picture from the Tavistock is very very clear that trying to repeat the Dutch protocol failed to produce even neutral results. Hahahaha it exists to be cited rather than actually read! None of you read it as seen from all these comments. It is absolutely full of quotes from trans ppl and ppl who went through Tavistock. "The deaths they've caused" citation needed again. It's literally part of the Cass Review to cover deaths. More wild claims of "conversion therapy" when talking about a document showing 81/89% of those at Tavistock were same-sex attracted. You can't just claim ppl are doing evil things, you have to justify that evidence. But you can't because it doesn't exist. The Cass review and all of the members specifically explicitly say that no intervention should try to change someone's identity. Why lie? Except that the truth is too difficult to confront. So yes falsehoods were spread about 98% throughout the trans community and still exist on reddit boards as the principle criticism. Why no exploration of the fact that the studies are not good enough and we need better ones? Oh cos it doesn't fit the, give anyone anything they want narrative which requires no medical input whatsoever. Everything spoken about here clearly shows none of you read the Cass review. Wow that was a completely strawman representation of her words that had no connection whatsoever. 60% of ppl but I doubt that's parents nor are they thinking about young children. "Wrong side of History" is a position of historical ignorance. More false claims of deaths directly connected to trans care. This hysteria of trans=victim or - cide is very very harmful to trans ppl. Terrible comparison of blood infection. Physical and Mental health aren't the same. Lol "debunking" when did that happen. So your hero is ppl who illegally sell drugs to children and adults! After you said we need "informed consent"! Well you just destroyed your own position and revealed that you think we need a free for all where any child can get anything with zero basic safeguarding. It's also a position which makes more sense if you are only thinking about males who suffer fewer side effects. It's a shame you didn't explore how adult gender clinics refused to share their information with the Cass Report At no point did they defend their identity. They might have been asked to defend how their views are not fundamentally sexist and homophobic. "Suppressing conversations" is what trans activists do. They won't appear in open discussion because their ideas get ripped to pieces. Also when did Nish start identifying as a comedian?
    2
  20. Why did they refuse you?
    2
  21.  @KatalepticBoots  Oh they keep asking me a question, I respond, they flag the comment so it looks like I couldn't respond instead of responding to it
    2
  22.  @TomCantDance  I'm sending a follow up message in case mine disappears, let me know if you can see it. Still not sure if it was a genuine request.
    2
  23.  @saoirse2963  Lia Thomas was literally on an AGP social media group with thousands of members. But It DoEsN't ExIsT It's bizarre how being "pro-lgbtq" is now apparently being in favour of Iran transitioning the gay away
    2
  24. Go read the Cass Review and see what they actually said about up to the age of 25 which directly contradicts you. Also FFS this guilt by association is stupid. If you're going to do that at least be balanced with it and start mentioning all the links to criminals on the trans side leading rallies lol. A doctor contacted Cass about the preliminary results? I wonder why other doctors might be interested in what was being found at the world's largest gender clinic?
    2
  25. "I don’t actually believe that people need to go through sexual puberty to be a full adult" Someone wants to be on a list
    2
  26.  @janebennetto5655  Good on you Jane. Mr Lupus is unfortunately not a friend of reason or reality. He keeps asking people for evidence of the damage this movement causes to women and children despite being supplied with tons of examples.
    2
  27.  @itcouldbelupus2842  Who are taller? Trans men or trans women?
    2
  28.  @classycolas  Do you entirely agree with the standards of care 8 in Wpath? Or have you clearly not read them? What do you think of the chapter on, ytubf no likey so have to write bad, You-nux? And specifically the source for that chapter and the ppl proposing it as a gender identity? (one example of bias) Oh sorry you're just blindly attacking anything anyone says that you assume must be evilly intended because you ignorantly disagree. You won't actually seek out the information for yourself.
    2
  29.  @DisgruntledPeasant  How do you feel about the incredibly high rates of same sex attraction amongst those "treated" at gender clinics? In the original Dutch Protocol study there were originally 70 patients (2 died and many were lost to follow up), how many do you think were same sex attracted? Have a guess who is the world leader in "sex reassignment surgeries" and why.
    1
  30.  @DisgruntledPeasant  "But pick any one characteristic of gender associated with male or female and you will find that there is not a 100% dimorphism for it." Yes, if you ignore sex and go headfirst into gender you get into any all kinds of nonsensical positions. Meanwhile sex remains constant. "At what point does this devolve into a ship of thesius kinda situation, where no individual component of gender can be pointed to as an inherent part of gender, and we have to go off vibes?" Congrats you've explained why gender is absolute BS and should be dismantled not upheld by sexist, homophobic ideas that being a man or a woman is anything more than a biological reality-directly based on your SEX. "You may say it is simply a case of gamedes and genes, but again intersex people throw that one off too." It's gametes mate. "intersex people" throw off gender not sex, they are categorised as male or female like every other human. "And what of people who have every social and psychological characteristic of one gender but the genes of another?" You couldn't define what these characteristics of one gender were if your life depended on it but again you've proven why gender is of use to us in society. You've successfully argued that we shouldn't base our society around gender identity or gender stereotypes, well done. "I highly recommend watching Abigail Thorns recent video on this topic, she is far more intelligent than myself" No argument here. I mean he knows his arguments are lies and BS whereas you apparently don't.
    1
  31.  @jsrodman  "@jsrodman 1 day ago (edited)" Oh the shame. He's a transphobe get him activists! Activists?
    1
  32.  @mantistoboggan1503  That sounds like we shouldn't be organising societies around it then. Maybe we should stick to more objective ideas for laws such as sex.
    1
  33.  @classycolas  I didn't order another strawman argument from a clown. You explain in what way you're a man and we'll see if it's sexist. How do you know you "pass"? How do you know ppl don't think you're just a harmless trans identifying female and they go along out of social pressure? How tall are you?
    1
  34.  @Snuzzled   Can you point me to where "social dysphoria" is recognized as a medical issue/diagnosis. Your response shows that you see "social dysphoria" as a part of gender dysphoria. One that is exacerbated by society's gender norms. You've said that boys and girls get differing amounts of alleviation based on how accepting society is. Logically without those norms the "social dysphoria" would dissappear meaning that gender dysphoria is, in part at least, caused by the society around you. That's the logical conclusion of your opinion. This doesn't explain the 4000/10000% increase but I'm still not sure if you purposefully misrepresented the figure or just didn't realize that you were wrong. Logically based on your ideas girls wouldn't be as subjected to as much stress for non-conformity so we would see far fewer of them in gender clinics. But if your general idea that dysphoria is affected by society is true then we'd know that teen girls are most affected by social influences as seen in body dysmorphia, eating disorders, tics, "multiple personality disorders", cutting etc. Cough Social Contagion Cough The physical discomfort makes sense as falling under the umbrella of body dysmorphia just centered in specific sexed areas. Logically it should have a similar style of treatment as related, and far more dangerous, mental health issues such as anorexia. If I follow your logic on "she" then it's not transphobic to call someone "he" when your innate ability to tell what sex someone is tells you that someone is male. I'm sure you'd argue against this point however because you have no logical coherency and will keep moving arguments around to serve the idea you like best and not follow them where they lead. Calling someone "she" when you perceive them to be a "woman" can be sexist depending on what woman means to you. If it's Mr A Long Chu then clearly it's sexist to use the term "she" for example. Unfortunately trans ppl regularly explain their identity in sexist tropes. Or sometimes homophobic ones too such as Ellen Page's position. Fundamentally if you use she or he or they based on gender not sex then you're being sexist. Because you're judging men and women on gender norms, roles, sexist stereotypes not on the innate objective characteristic. If you think society is making ppl feel worse by not accepting gender non-conformity then just cut out the middle man and abolish gender. Don't enable ppl trying to conform to another gender instead. Feel free to come back to argue against your own ideas as I present them back to you. We'll take the parts where you skip points made as concessions.
    1
  35.  @Snuzzled  You've just renamed it "social dysphoria". Or you could see it as that you've highlighted that when communities don't reinforce sexist stereotypes, such as the "trans community", the gender dysphoria disippates. Almost like that's better than medical interventions at doing that. But of course we already knew that.
    1
  36.  @rachelbayston5007  What sources would you like? Unfortunately because ppl just report everything they dislike then my comments disappear
    1
  37.  @Snuzzled  Don't know if it was by mistake but you said "there was a 400 percent increase" but it's 4000%. I mean if we're splitting hairs then go back further and it's 10,000%. Tbf otherwise at least you've presented some reasoning. It sounds like you think gender dysphoria is caused by the society around them accepting or not accepting gender nonconformity.
    1
  38.  @itcouldbelupus2842  I started watching that video and the first two points were wildly false: a) suggesting it's working as intended to put kids on puberty blockers b) Absolutely ludicrously claiming that Cass is saying puberty blockers turn you gay! Fuck me if you are going to lie then why not make it a whopper. This video is absolutely laughable and not worth an hour of anyone's time. I thought it was meant to be by medical professionals or with references?! What a pathetic joke you guys are
    1
  39.  @nickthepostpunk5766  These guys know they could look at the Cass Review themselves and check the claims they make in order to save themselves the humiliation of repeating clear and obvious lies. The methodology is ridiculously transparent and yet they've might the most mind-numbingly dumb claims. They're just cowards, they don't dare go read for themselves because they know their beliefs will come crumbling down. If I thought there was a dragon called Geoff in the Quran and someone told me there wasn't I'd go look it up and know if it was there or not. For someone to keep writing spiel after spiel instead of just looking at Cass and going, oh, clearly I'm wrong is so fucking pathetic. He doesn't trust you because he doesn't agree with you and therefore prefers to make an arse or himself and cling to an idea that was literally shown to be untrue in the interview and that even the BBC debunked. We are truly talking to religious extremists.
    1
  40.  @rachelbayston5007  No it's not. Every single systematic review of evidence has resulted in affirmative care being rolled back on that basis (plus the crap results and side effects). Show me in the systematic review in Sweden, Finland, Norway, France, UK where they've claimed to have a good evidence base. Stop calling things you haven't read lies. You not reading something doesn't mean it doesn't exist I still need to know which sources you need. I post them all the time and none of you read them. You all prove yourselves incredibly ignorant of the research
    1
  41.  @LilyJones-mu2cy  Are you saying that anyone who is trans and female is a trans man or agreeing/disagreeing that there are more trans men than trans women which seems to annoy the hell out of the male trans ppl
    1
  42.  @itcouldbelupus2842  Mate your claim that they threw out anything not double blinded is false because that would leave literally nothing. So you're claiming that they threw away all the studies and somehow produced graphs and stats and recommendations on literally 0 studies. Obviously that's false You can't say, well I've never read the Cass report but I believe lunatic youtubers who say, for example in the video you linked, "Cass decides if "trans children live or die" and think you get to argue with ppl who have actually read it (which the youtuber blatantly hasn't). If we're going to do that then at least me get involved. I've never read the Torah but I believe it says always Jewish should be called Margery and nothing you can say will change my mind.
    1
  43.  @itcouldbelupus2842  I'm not surprised that an authoritarian like you doesn't know you loon
    1
  44.  @itcouldbelupus2842   Mate you are unhinged. I already told you I watch the start of that insane persons video where he says all kinds of batshit crazy things and accuses Cass of wanting to torture and kill children. While mainly commenting on age and looks. If that is your best evidence then there's no point arguing. It's hilariously bad. It's not a bad faith argument. Trans women are on average half a foot taller than trans men. The same as men are half a foot taller than women. If you think it's irrelevant because each individual is different then we wouldn't have the division in sport in the first place. Refusal to answer is the bad faith position. I don't even believe most trans ppl think that males should be allowed in female sport.
    1
  45.  @rachelbayston5007  HAHAHAHAHAHAHA Of course they're sources! What on earth is the Stephen Levine study if not a source! You aren't capable of reading them. You asked me for sources. I asked what in particular you wanted them for. You refused to give me an idea. So I gave you some of the best broad ones. Now you want me to make a claim?! You're constantly commenting on a video about the Cass Review which YOU HAVEN'T READ. What is the point of this dance if you won't read anything and when presented with a bunch of sources your response is: LA LA LA I'M NOT LISTENING Please stop identifying as a child. I'm not interested in being a witness for your pathetic humiliation
    1
  46.  @rachelbayston5007  When you are provided with sources you just proclaim them to not be sources. You go out of your way to not read them. You're the epitomy of bigotry, a word used unironically by trans activists all the time while proclaiming only one viewpoint is allowed lol.
    1
  47.  @Unknown-ov2kz  The average height of a trans woman is equal to a man. Height is a factor in sporting success. Trans women have the same hip and bone joints as men. The hip positioning in women makes them slower and more susceptible to specific types of running injury. Women deal with issues like menopause and menstruation. Trans women do not. Weight is a factor in sporting success. Trans women weigh on average the same as men. Males have about a 50% advantage in lifting weights. They also have similar advantages in explosive muscle groups. They also have 50-150% advantage in grip strength. There is no evidence of this reducing in trans women. The difference in males and females can be seen from age 8 (depending on sports, e.g. this is swimming) and becomes far larger from puberty onwards. Unsurprisingly the trans women that compete do so in sports where these are major factors. Many of them are 10/20/30 years older than the age we would expect for women. The claim that trans ppl were allowed to compete since 2004 is obscuring the rules in place that meant almost no trans ppl could compete. Then they changed it to mainly hormonal based and it prevented some female athletes from competing. When female coaches and athletes were asked about the issue (which they hadn't been previously) it was unanimously overturned so we won't have that farce again. It also shows an incredible lack of following of sport which is common amongst trans activists. We've seen trans people compete and win all kinds of titles but common ones are weightlifting (e.g. Pacific Games held by son of a millionaire aged 43 who didn't take up the sport until much later and beat a Samoan 16 yr old who comes from a culture with a third gender but where people of that gender never compete in women's sports), cycling such as Rachel Mckinnon/Victoria Ivy (name changed after celebrating someone's death), Running and Running in the Paralympics (Italian who says misogynistic things) Running where numerous scholarships in the USA have gone to "trans women" who don't even want to compete in sport later in life. There are other sports that have been devastated, we had the farce of a trans woman in women's tennis years ago, darts, snooker, pool, skateboarding where a man beat a 13-yr-old into silver. We have FEMALE sport for very good reasons. People want to watch an all female competition. The difference between female and male is apparent to everyone and you have to purposefully blind yourself in order to pretend it isn't. I genuinely think the VAST number of trans people agree that a female sporting category should exist and that trans women shouldn't compete in it. If we say we make males "equal" to females and then allow them to compete then why not all males? Why not let males carry extra handicaps or inject drugs to reduce their performance and let them compete? Why not do the same with youth or Paralympic sports? If I identify as disabled can't I take some drugs to reduce my ability and play wheelchair basketball or compete in swimming for those who have lost limbs? The whole "dominating" or "not dominating" thing is stupid and means that logically if trans people start dominating then you guys would then demand they all left the sport. The fact is males have multiple unfair advantages and people who watch sport want to watch fair all-female categories. Hence why they don't care if a non-binary woman is a hypocrite because she has no advantages and her internal beliefs are not important. But before we even get to those ethical questions then the onus would be on studies PROVING that males become equal to females. This has never been done. Because it can't be done. Trans activists are constantly demanding evidence, then ignoring it, against ludicrous positions. You are the guys with the extremist beliefs and therefore you guys need to present your case. If what you've provided is your case then I could genuinely provide a better case for all kinds of ludicrous positions in sports.
    1
  48.  @ekvilist  If you expect these guys to answer a question then good luck. If you expect to get one in good faith then you're highly optimistic. BTW go and look at why almost no trans ppl competed in 2004 and how the rules changed and suddenly we got a bunch of old males deciding to try to compete. Oh and how when female athletes and coaches were actually asked (you know the people with the best understanding of how fair it is to compete against males) they overwhelmingly disagreed and so we won't have trans ppl at the next Olympics.
    1
  49.  @Gladissims    Firstly there are 189 comments in here and mine get hidden so I don't know what exactly you're responding to. I don't think I'll have said no women assault women. It's incredibly incredibly rare for female to assault females. I believe you've made a false claim that trans women are more likely to be assaulted in a male prison than assault in a female one. What are you basing that on? In the UK I've seen no evidence of trans women being victims in male prisons more than other males. We do know that 7 women were r** by 6 different male offenders in Scotland in just 4 years and with fewer than 20 males included. If you have evidence I will read it. But that rate of return is clearly not worth it. How do you separate any male who says he is a woman from "genuine" trans women? Your bad faith strawman question is noted. It damages your argument so please refrain. If you want to make that argument truly then we'd have to start including far more vulnerable males such as mentally disabled or very small or pdf files in the women's estate before any male who identifies as a woman. Being trans doesn't automatically make you a victim. I think you're referring to when a woman was r**d by a male on a woman's ward. You're clearly ignorant of the case and the law. Everything you said about that is ignorant and false. You should read up on the case before commenting or you make a fool of yourself. The policeman was aware of the law, r** can only be committed by a male with a p***. Since they started recording trans women as women I think we've seen a bizarre rise from 0 r***s committed by women to triple figures in a decade. Any idea why that could be? Clearly a mystery why women have suddenly started committing violent and s* crimes. You've made sweeping statements based on ideological beliefs that you can't back up. Statistically trans women murder more people than trans people are murdered. Statically trans women have a slightly higher rate of criminality than other males and in particular s** and violent crimes. There are zero sources that show trans women have a female criminal pattern. Because they don't. The issue being that the term "trans woman" is just a male who says he is a woman. Which means any inclusion of trans women leaves the door wide open to all males. To you guys all of these males are trans women. You won't countenance the clear and obvious fact that letting trans women in has a detrimental effect on women and children.
    1
  50.  @itcouldbelupus2842  I'm not surprised that an authoritarian like you doesn't know you loon
    1
  51.  @Aarenby  I've sent no one to affirmative care where the original study had 69/70 patients as same-sex attracted and the Tavistock had 81/88% same-sex attracted. In both cases all the practitioners explained that the vast majority of children grew up gay.
    1
  52.  @paulhammond6978  What a transphobic position. All those who are female and identify as trans just must be trans men because non-binary isn't a thing. How dare you. Jammidodger completely ignores numerous attempts to contact and debate. Silly claim, but I think you meant for this channel which shows you struggle with simple concepts. I once asked Jammidodger on a livestream "What do you think of the systematic reviews of evidence?" They immediately called me a transphobe and closed down the livestream. That's how open to discourse these people are. It's not even a debate that the groups who want access to affirmative care are, in order of size,: 1 Teen Females 2 Adult Males 3 Young boys (4/5/6/7) The third group used to be the first. You can look at any country in Europe and you'll see the same. Why even dispute this? Why is it a threat to your world view? It's something you can even look at in the transgender survey where you can similarly see that non-binary has exploded compared to the past. Again, why dispute this? What a stupid hill to die on. It's almost like you think showing that numbers have exploded amongst the female population brings into question the whole movement. Btw the "trans people have always existed" is largely in patriarchal, misogynistic, homophobic societies where the third gender is created, barely resembles modern trans ideals and is entirely made up of males. These societies claimed to have no homosexuals. It's a pattern you can see time and again. But History is not something you guys go in for. Cos it teaches you to think about sources in an objective way. The claim that we've always had an equal distribution of male and female trans ppl has zero evidence for it. It also throws up many questions and would rely on one interpretation of what "causes" "transness" which logically you guys would have to explore deeper. Unfortunately depth is not a strong suit in the "community".
    1
  53.  @IsaacMyers1  OK so you think you can be an adult, in the sense of able to consent, but not go through the process that makes you an adult? While simultaneously consenting before that whole process to things that no pre-pubertal child is capable of unpicking and making a decision on. You were also CLEARLY talking about 12 yr olds. BTW if your reasoning of 4 years were adhered to then the vast majority of children presenting at gender clinics would be ruled out of these interventions.
    1
  54. Incidentally a disproportionate number of children from the care system end up at gender clinics. Particularly if they suffered abuse or are autistic. Almost like there's a link. Oh and every single systematic review of evidence has led to rolling back "affirmative care" because of its lack of evidence base. Which if you go look at the original Dutch protocol and see the red flags everywhere is not surprising. They instead suggest a holistic approach which would look into the whole picture such as family life, housing situation, childhood trauma . . . wait a minute . . . It's almost like that might prevent kids in care getting worse outcomes.
    1
  55.  @classycolas  I wrote a response to this and it immediately disappeared. If you were female at conception you're female for life. This means you need greater protections because 88% of victims of s assault are female and 99% of attackers are male. So you should always have access to female spaces. I bet that wrong-footed you. Trans identification plays a negligible role in this. If you want to be pedantic it increases the likelihood of committing s offences but this will include self-id males who use that identity for this express purpose. There is no evidence anywhere on the planet of "trans women" having criminality in line with women nor even close.
    1
  56.  @paulhammond6978  Do me a favour, explain what a trans woman is and then explain how that is a woman. OK, you can't. Thanks. Now look up "thought-ending cliché". Mate my whole point was that they are NO LONGER a right. One that you can trace back decades to at least the 1940s as a Human Right. This is in part because the word "gender" which always used to be a synonym for sex in our legal code no longer is seen that way. The fact that sex-based rights in many Western countries are not protected is not a positive. It is a fucking travesty. If you're against a system that provably keeps vulnerable female prisoners safe then I can only imagine that is extreme misogyny. The rate of r---s in the Scottish women's prison went from 0 by any prisoner at any time to 7 by 6 different "trans women" in a four year period. Why do you think that is? Why, if we only compare "trans women" to "trans men" do "trans women" commit over 95% of the crimes and particularly the violent and sexual ones? Why do you think we don't let the "trans men" into the men's prison? Explain how having two self-id systems of prisons would make any sense whatsoever. I look forward to you not dealing with any of my points.
    1
  57.  @brendadarling7743  A select group of very angry little men are showing the kinds of nonsense that was being spouted. To give you an idea the "heroes" of the big AGP male were drug dealers who sell hormones to children illegally after claiming to be in favour of "informed consent". I did find out about a hilarious website that Mr Lupus thinks "debunks" the Cass Review. He's the one who accused you of confirmation bias which is the most amazing bit of hypocrisy and cognitive dissonance. It was a pleasurable read of the "evidence" written by "experts" (My best guess is it was written by someone with a reading issue) as they blamed either Hilary Cass or the Cass Report for understaffing at the Tavistock. Apparently she/it should have gone back in time and recruited people to a place she didn't work? Clearly it's transphobic of them to have not invented time travel. That gives you a good idea of how far away from reality it was. There were numerous times when I read what they claimed they did or didn't do and went, I literally read that part of the report yesterday, that's a lie. I dismantled it on this page but I doubt no one will read it. They aren't big on reading. More in favour of copying and pasting. It was well worth reading the Cass Review, a little less explosive than the Wpath files in some ways but a little more conclusive in others.
    1
  58.  @rachelbayston5007  You want me to provide you sources of every third gender society that has ever existed on the planet? Look up the Fafafine in Samoa who "don't have gay ppl" P Vasey has studies on them. Or you can look up the history of the Hijra. Or travestis in Brazil. Just take your pick mate. Rigid patriarchal sexist homophobic society tells young boy he's too effeminate to be a man and he becomes a sex slave. Said society claims to have no gay ppl. It's a pattern that is prevalent throughout past and some modern societies and is the most common form of third gender. But I don't need to go get you a bunch of studies (although you'll easily find them with Fafafine P Vasey) you won't read because you think saying "SoUrCeS" is some kind of gotcha because you are the kind of disingenuous person who doesn't have an opinion based on them. You aren't actually interested in knowing more or you'd go look for studies yourself. The most obvious case of how this ideology is being used to suppress gay ppl is that the countries with the most "sex changes" are places like Iran and Saudia Arabia who tell gay couples either they get thrown of a tall building or one of them transitions. You can also look at how the Tavistock had 81/88% same-sex attracted children (you'd have to read the Cass Review or Michael Biggs) and a culture of homophobia. Or we can go back to the original Dutch protocol study on which this is all built (which you won't be familiar with even though it's the first step in all this) which had 69/70 same sex attracted children.
    1
  59.  @classycolas   If "women's spaces" allow any male who self-ids in then they aren't women's spaces. I think you think you have a gotcha. Because you haven't thought deeply about this issue not listened to the arguments. If you were born female you're always female. If I see you as female it's because we have an innate ability to spot sex but more importantly in the males who pose a danger. Sorry but you can't change sex. As a member of the female sex you deserve rights that are different from males. Single-sex female spaces should be only open to females like you. If you think you'd make women and children uncomfortable you can choose to self-exclude should you wish in the same way that good men know to cross the road if they think they'll make young girls at night uncomfortable. But your sex makes you more vulnerable to males and single sex spaces keep you safe. The "male" secondary sex characteristics you have (whatever they may be and probably debatable ones) can't be use to r***. And, while there's some weak evidence "trans men" might commit more crime due to testosterone it's nowhere near the rate of crime in males and not in the same violent or sexual ways. Fundamentally you don't understand the point of single-sex female spaces. I think you think they are the opposite side of the male version instead of being a specific need that doesn't exist in males. Spaces split by self-id gender serve absolutely no purpose. You can't find an argument for them. Do you think "trans men" should be allowed in the men's prisons? Or do you recognize that that would be a recipe for disaster? I've heard your copied pasted argument before. How about you learn to think for yourself? I doubt you'll be back. I notice that you didn't answer the question I posed so we can acknowledge that single-sex female spaces have been destroyed by ignorant people like you servicing the adult males with paraphilias who run your cult from the top down.
    1
  60.  @izzy0052  Are single-sex female spaces a right that females have? Or have they been destroyed across the West? Despite this being part of recognised Human Rights back to the 40s.
    1
  61.  @Aarenby  Calling everyone a r*****t doesn't ever get tiring for you? I mean you've been calling women r*****ts for days when there are literally zero r** convictions for women in the UK. Oh, sorry, there were zero convictions for r***. Now there are a fair few for that new male type of woman but for some reason none of the old outdated female type have been at it. Come on ladies! Catch up!
    1
  62.  @Self_deleted_Tran  There are a select few male activists harassing everyone and yet youtube protects them and deletes normal messages. "Aarenby" has accused probably 50 ppl of SA in the last 3 days. Are they working for youtube? I can't even see your original comment because I think they've falsely reported it.
    1
  63.  @itcouldbelupus2842  The article you're quoting I have personally debunked. It outright lies about the independent review of evidence and, rather hilariously, contradicts itself in numerous places including in the part of "inconsistencies". None of the people "debunking" are experts, they clearly have basic literacy issues. Or are just plain lying.
    1
  64.  @DisgruntledPeasant  Can you stop with the intersex gambit already?
    1
  65.  @DisgruntledPeasant  You must live in an echo chamber if you don't understand. This line of questioning is so repetitively bad faith and false that it even has its own name as a particular bad faith argument. There are literally hundreds of youtube videos on it let alone actual articles or things of worth. BTW the people against these treatments ARE against unnecessary hormones and surgeries on "intersex ppl" (ppl with DSDs). In 2024 the NHS does precisely zero interventions on ppl with DSD conditions "make them fit an assigned gender more neatly". So following your own argument you are against affirmative care. Congrats you checkmated yourself while playing Hungry Hungry Hippoes.
    1
  66.  @iloveyoubigmantyrone5609  "my sex is changed because of hormones". Sorry but humans can't change sex. Sex is not just hormones. Did you think this was some sort of a gotcha? Because you just got yourself.
    1
  67.  @romuloroman  I agree let's abolish gendered spaces. Let's get single-sex female spaces that have been proven to keep women and children safe for decades if not centuries. The way they work is by not allowing males in. This is why we build them in every single developing country to help vastly improve women's lives. I mean are you actually in favour of mixed sex prisons?
    1
  68.  @peterpanda5069  Did you not follow up the story? She didn't die because of a bathroom attack.
    1
  69.  @DisgruntledPeasant  This is all wildly false. Most "intersex" ppl find out in puberty they have a DSD which affects very little usually other than fertility. They are easily categorised as male or female. About half a dozen kids in the year are "assigned at birth" because of real medical need in modern cases usually it's an issue of their urinary tract or some other digestive surgery required if you don't want the baby to die. The claim it is a common experience for trans ppl to find out they're "intersex" is also false. Gender dysphoria is higher amongst this group but trans identity is broadly the same. The figure of intersex equals ginger has been debunked and was never taken seriously in the first place. It clearly makes no sense given your other claims. Hospitals would be doing surgeries on babies to "assign their gender" at an extraordinary rate if this were true. The figure of those with DSD is less than 0.02%.
    1
  70. Go read the Cass Review and you'll quickly find that numerous claims made by TransActual are wildly false. Other times they contradict their own criticisms. Other times they make entirely unfounded (invented?) claims that have no source to follow up. Then they also use tweets to talk about under 25s because they've misunderstood what the Cass Review actually says. Those tweets logically argue against puberty blockers but because that isn't what is wanted by the authors they ignore them later. It's a mess. You might disagree with parts of the Cass Review but if you look at it yourself I seriously doubt you'll come out thinking it's this bizarre evilness that is claimed.
    1
  71.  @Alan_Duval  Well, if I believed that "conversion therapy advocates" were involved I'd be right there with you. I followed the trans activist sources back and the best I get is a tweet from a trans person saying that someone not massively involved in the review was in favour of gender exploratory therapy. They then said this was basically conversion therapy. That is my absolute best attempt at steelmanning the viewpoint. I am 100% open to any other info to follow up this line of inquiry. "On the other end, it's important to situate the statistics and scientific findings with the lived experiences of actual trans people, both as data points (interviews and such) and as part of the entire information-gathering process (the core team)." If you're an activist yes. If you're interested in the treatment of gender dysphoria then no, the last part isn't a requirement. It's like saying any review of help for people with Down syndrome or in a coma needs to include people in those circumstances. It's also obvious that trans ppl were included to an extraordinary level, I've never seen a review of evidence like it. How do we even know the gender identity of all the people involved in the review?! "I agree that the exclusion criteria for puberty blocker research seem designed to exclude the majority of research." Sorry but that doesn't even make sense, they included 60% of research and it's based on systematic review which commonly do this. Transactual also plain lied about the claim. Go look at another systematic review for something nothing connected to this. Your ideas on off-label seem to miss a few things. There is increasing evidence that we shouldn't use puberty blockers in any but the most extreme cases of precocious puberty. The other claims also make sense when not applied to children. We rarely use drugs off-label for children unless we use them for the same condition in adults. You've purposefully hidden what part of your sources you're referring to. Is this called a Gish Gallop or does it have another name. NICE has one reference to "off-label" and one to FDA as "background information". But from what I read, none of this is relevant. Bizarrely you've gone to major measures on this part but fuck all on anything else. Your point is that because the American system of massively overprescribing anything is absolutely fucked we should blindly follow their lead. I mean they still allow asbestos. Your domino effect twattery is idiotic. Please note that these drugs are NOT used for precocious puberty in anything other than an off-label way. So this whole line of argument falls to pieces. It also takes into account absolutely zero medical evidence which is ludicrous. The usage in precocious puberty is completely different to using them in children much later for "affirmative care" where no one seems to actually define the actual purpose of the drugs. I know people say "time to think" but not one study uses that as its basis. Anyway, your main problem with this seems to be a bunch of legal and medical red tape and bureaucracy. Not what the systematic review of evidence actually shows. Presumably because that's more difficult to argue with. Oh and no, it's ludicrous to argue that pre-16 is precocious puberty. But if it were then that would be beyond the scope of the Cass Review making it entirely irrelevant, again. Your argument does however suggest that trans/gender dysphoria is an incredibly new thing and therefore you'd have to explain why it has massively spiked. Again, the transactual article quotes someone who entirely disagrees with you on the importance of puberty. But if we summarise your views, you disagree with the Cass Review on the following medical points: - End I still don't understand how you found the link helpful when they gave you zero evidence for the claims you took from them.
    1
  72.  @itcouldbelupus2842  I've followed up those claims and the closest to conversion therapy is a trans activist tweet saying that something that isn't conversion therapy is kinda like conversion therapy for someone who wasn't important and I can't even find mentioned in the report or sources. Please shut up with your inane, BuT tHe ExPeRtS sAy No. None of you can mention even 1 human being that disagrees and is an expert. I've asked you personally for info and you personally have absolutely zero evidence for your claims. Saying it doesn't hold up to critical thought is a bit rich from someone who has never had one and never read it. GROW SOME BACKBONE AND EXPLAIN WHAT IS WRONG WITH EVIDENCE I DON'T CARE IF SATAN AND HITLER WROTE IT IF NONE OF YOU CAN DEMONSTRATE ANYTHING ACTUALLY WRONG WITH WHAT IT SAYS AND IT'S SCIENTIFIC BASE THE FACT NOT A SINGLE TRANS ACTIVIST HAS BEEN ABLE TO POINT TO A SINGLE ACTUAL MISTAKE IN WHAT IT ACTUALLY SAYS IS A SEARING INDICTMENT OF YOUR BELIEF SYSTEM
    1
  73.  @Alan_Duval   Sorry but it's a long reply. Part 1. You're all over the place because you keep acting like gender dysphoric=trans. It is not anti-trans to have the alleviation of gender dysphoria as the goal. Especially when the majority of those with gender dysphoria grow up non-trans and trans and we don't know who is who. It's also not pro-trans to give kids puberty blockers who likely wouldn't grow up trans (as is the case in 95% of the original cohort in the Tavistock and later in 80% of those not on puberty blockers). Or even those who are trans but who would likely lose gender dysphoria without them. It's not a smoking gun unless you're a conspiracy theorist. And you didn't deal with my point of what the purpose of the puberty blockers is. They aren't time to think (they stop you developing cognitively to think better, they concretise the gender identity), there's no evidence they prevent - cides and they most certainly are awful for gender dysphoria. So you aren't even arguing for them with a clear idea of why. You also didn't touch the point of the difference in usage. Mate if that's your evidence for conversion therapy, that the aim is alleviate gender dysphoria, then you'll believe anything. I'm still waiting for the actual evidence of these claims. When we say the evidence base is weak for your guys point of view it is exactly this. Nothing concrete, choosing to purposefully assume the worst in people who have spotless records and in the Cass have a proven record of moral and ethical integrity such as being a whistleblower. I think we can safely say the claim in that article is bollocks. Being that you refuse to defend it and I've followed it to what I believe to be its origin. Your interpretation of the mental state of pre-pubertal children is ludicrous. Kids aren't like that. We also know that GPs send kids to the gender clinics assuming that they'll investigate with them deeply but as the Tavistock got overwhelmed by an entirely new cohort of teen girls and waiting lists extended many kids got locked into affirmative care as the only solution thanks to trans activist lies and when they got to the gender clinics quickly got moved on to the next stage of the medicalisation conveyor belt. Far from being the young boys who had gender dysphoria from age 5. This is the group who get it coinciding with the first elements of puberty. There's no logical reason to think we treat them exactly the same. No, your argument isn't medical. It was based on the idea that we use precocious puberty on label and therefore can use it on label for what you see as the same use. The problem being that it's clearly not the same use. I just filled in extra context to show why medically that is also stupid. But you argued based on a bureaucratic version based on a lack of understanding of how puberty blockers are used and a false supposition. You have now abandoned this position. Proving once again that it was a bad argument. If we want to be really generous we can say you argued on the medical basis that precocious puberty=affirmative care. But personally I think that's more insulting to your level of intelligence than what the bulk of your argument was. Puberty age drops when you have a regular balanced diet. It takes longer if you struggle to get enough calories on a regular basis. In the past puberty was earlier in the better off classes but not in the peasant classes who had poor diets. It was arguably earlier in non-agrarian societies whose diets are worse than agrarian societies too. The move to agrarian societies had trade offs. Sure we can add a whole load of other factors (although not most of your insane ones like that the religious right make kids start puberty early) and we can investigate why it is early but that is irrelevant to the point in hand. Precocious puberty isn't just "early". They don't prescribe unless you are two years below the accepted range of puberty which means age 7 or 8. Nowhere near 15. I don't need to cite anything for something I assumed you had the most minimum understanding of. If you don't know what a precocious puberty diagnosis entails you can look it up. You will find that it isn't, are you under 16 and have started puberty? As the person making that claim which outside of accepted understanding you'd be the one who would have to provide the sources that the medical community agree with you. They don't. And if I follow this argument logically then you're saying we should prescribe puberty blockers to gender dysphoric kids to pause their precocious puberty. Which is monumentally laughably idiotic. It would also logically involve prescribing puberty blockers to basically the majority of kids age at some point starting 10-15. Another utterly bonkers idea. But then you don't actually believe your argument which is why you keep abandoning them and looking for another and hoping it will stick. That link doesn't work for me. If I understand what you're saying in that paragraph, which I am not clear on without that context, your point is that it should take into account other uses of puberty blockers and the evidence we have about those groups too. WHICH IT DOES. The fact you didn't read the Cass Review failed you again mate. I will agree that they could have added a bit more strongly that it would appear puberty blockers are related to body image issues. If they'd have done that however trans activists would be moaning that there isn't good enough evidence of that. These ideas also go against your, we need to put every kid on puberty blockers, idea. That's an actual example of a contradiction. Your ideas about the numbers of trans ppl like your ideas of autism don't fully explain the full picture. Clearly the latter isn't just public knowledge of the issue. Interestingly enough undiagnosed autism is part of the picture of gender dysphoria with certain elements of autism better explaining the symptoms. You are disingenuously ignoring the complete change in cohort from effectively only young boys, mainly gay to this group being now third behind teen girls and adult males. The time line is also off. If there was a gender clinic in the 1930s and surgeries in the 60s and 70s and in the UK a gender clinic with a consistent flat number of patients, the same as the Netherlands, the same as Sweden, the same as anywhere you look but then it all spiked around the same time and with teen girls then the stats don't fit the narrative. You can say it's part of the picture but clearly it doesn't explain the teen girls or adult males. It also doesn't explain why kids with gender dysphoria are more likely to have suffered abuse or a traumatic loss or grown up in care or without a parent or be same sex attracted. I think you think it's innate which doesn't fit the evidence. Particularly given the new non-binary group which outnumber the trans men in females now. An identity restricted to the 21st century West. That doesn't fit your pattern. Also ppl have known about third gender societies (not similar to non-binary except in superficial ways) for centuries in the West and studied them in History, sociology, anthropological. We still didn't have anyone identifying as hijra or fafafine who is not in that society. Because these are socio-cultural identities.
    1
  74.  @Alan_Duval  Part 2 The trans actual article relies on tweets, lol, to try to disprove the false claim that Cass is on about you aren't an adult before 25. In the tweets it claims that strictly speaking then being able to make decisions should be when you pass through puberty. Precisely when "you are capable of reproducing" you can be considered an adult. This would logically counter the use of puberty blockers as they prevent you reaching that point. According to his logic no one can be considered mentally competent to agree to medication until after puberty. I mean there are also some very dodgy logical positions if you think going through puberty is enough to be treated as an adult. Particularly if we look at those with precocious puberty (the real kind not your invented type) it does bring up some red flags about him. If I were like you I'd say this were conclusive indisputable proof he is a pdf file. But I'm not and require more than that to start confidently flinging accusations around. Nope you've still got zero medical concerns with the findings of Cass. Ok so you said a link was helpful to something you hadn't read. You do you mate. How you judged the link to be helpful without looking at it.... I've read the Cal Horton one. It is ludicrous. It is trying to argue Cass is biased while the writer is so laughably biased and has no relevant medical experience and only studies in transness as a trans person. I read the "cis-supremacy" claim which again has no evidence that that's what Cass thinks and relies on the same, if you want to alleviate distress you're anti-trans silliness. It also clearly doesn't understand the University of York were involved and often accuses Cass of things that were undertaken by others. Again, neither you nor I know the gender identity of the researchers involved in compiling the evidence. We don't know of they have experience of gender dysphoria. So the claim there is no one trans would first require us to show they are all non-trans. Then we have to show that there were good candidates of trans ppl with relevant experience working at the university of York who were excluded. I don't see where they source their evidence for this claim. I think they just assume. A bit like many claim no trans views were taken into account even though they are highlighted in eye-catching bubbles throughout. I think until you read the Cas review itself you can't pull rank mate and claim you've out read me. Particularly because not only did I read both these shitty "reviews" (bad articles) of the Cass Review. I obviously read them before you. I've also read a number of actual scientists and researchers talk about the Cass Review none of whom have these conspiracy theories and think it fits logically into what we already gained from the Swedish and Finnish ones. The ppl I've listened to who work directly in this field e.g. Stephen Levine, think it's the best review of evidence we have yet because of how objective it is, how neutral the language is, how it included trans ppl's views at an unprecedented rate (actually a criticism by the equivalent of your trans activist articles), how it is presented clearly, the methodology of the systematic reviews of evidence and the fact it was about the world's largest gender clinic and the one that tried to reproduce the Dutch protocol study at a larger scale and showed the results to be negative. Have you sought out the views of SEGM or Genspect on it? Of course not. Oh and I would be interested if you could outline what you think the purpose of puberty blockers are in affirmative care. I think you're afraid to commit to that type of view. You've clearly abandoned most of your original positions.
    1
  75.  @Alan_Duval  Oh BTW you might find the Kite Trusts responses and subsequent follow up with Cass useful. Clearly they fall on the pro-lgbtq+ side
    1
  76.  @Alan_Duval  Did you have any thoughts in the end?
    1
  77.  @TetsugakuSan  Notice how we never hear from these people again. These "healthcare professionals" can't deal with basic details as you point out that WPATH has been entirely discredited and, even before it was, had insane protocols for completely new types of "treatments" on new gender identities. I mean this person outright lied in such an obvious way claiming that "Cass and co did not meet with any actual LGBT patients or healthcare groups" which is so clearly bad faith and provably false that it makes it no wonder no one wants to listen to them. A cursory look at the document would debunk the claim. But looking at evidence is sign of being a troll apparently lol
    1
  78.  @Preciouspink  Sorry but your statement was indeed false but mine wasn't. You just claimed that "by every study and metric" what I said is false. A frankly silly claim. Especially as you mentioned a handful of metrics. I'm also not sure if you mention -cidality to obscure -cide rate or because you mistakenly think these are the same. Yes, the Swedish study is one part of the best available evidence we have as a longitudinal study. Every single metric showed incredibly poor outcomes including ones that in theory according to many (I assume you, but I don't know) should be solved or alleviated by "affirmative care". Things like mental health or physical health which were absolutely atrocious. Sure we can take into account that comparing to non-trans ppl we might not expect them to do as well. But for them to do so absolutely appallingly bad? We can also compare things like -cide rates to gender dysphoric people and see they are higher. Way higher. You're also disingenuously making it seem like the study is just about the 1970s when it included ppl discharged as late as 2003 and then looked at outcomes. It also shows that, far from being worse early on (as you'd expect if your theory were true), the biggest divergence came around 10 years after transition. Another way to say this would be "long term". The mortality rate sparks alarmingly after this point. There is another longitudinal study from Denmark which again shows very very poor rates of everything, particularly mental health, even though it's scope is closer to today. Both countries are among the best in the world for acceptance and tolerance. Then we have all the systematic reviews of evidence from multiple countries independently which all come to the same general conclusions. These are incidentally in the places where we've done this types of medical interventions for the longest and where most of the studies come from. We also know the origin of this in children is the Dutch protocol and when the Tavistock tried to repeat the results they got negative mental health outcomes whereas previously they used to get 95% of children to no longer have gender dysphoria (which later dropped to 80% when affirmative care became an option). These are the best types of evidence we have. While it's fair to say we don't have the full picture of many the side effects of puberty blockers, hormones, surgeries. The ones we've learnt of up to this point are pretty shocking such as osteoporosis in children, lack of any sexual sensation (possibly forever) in males if started early enough, massive increases in likelihood of things like heart disease in those taking testosterone, vaginal atrophy, early menopause, the numbers of complications particularly for females in "bottom surgeries" are incredible (I think the highest of any surgery but I might be wrong), incontinence, obviously infertility/sterility etc. To be fair we don't yet know much about the "non-binary" surgeries yet. Because none of the clinics seem to be interested in long term follow up. I wonder why that is? The 24 major medical organisations will most likely be a list of mainly American ones (massive outliers at this point) or ones who reference Wpath which is a frankly bizarre organisation that I have, as yet, got not one pro-affirmative care person to agree with in terms of their standards of care. If you share the list I will probably recognise it as a copy paste job from reddit. Btw saying "there are reasons" followed by an appeal to authority is incredibly weak. Particularly as I can say what the reasons are why multiple countries come to the same conclusions and base it on systematic reviews of evidence. Please note you've actually given zero evidence for your position. I am more than willing to read any study you have. From what you wrote you have lots of long term high quality evidence to share so I look forward to that. Please don't call me ignorant for having a different opinion. Based on the best available evidence.
    1
  79.  @mantistoboggan1503  I would be more than happy to live in a world where we weren't in the middle of a medical scandal. I started out being told that there were a few people who had gender dysphoria and this solved their issue. I was curious and then looked into it not really intending to find out that the evidence base is crap. I've watched the likes of Jammidodger. I unfortunately then followed up the claims and once you've seen the research you can't really unsee it. I have yet to find anyone who has read the original Dutch Protocol and not see gaping flaws in it and red flags everywhere. I'm also yet to find anyone who actually agrees with Wpath even though many people say they do. If I bring up what's in it many people think I'm inventing it. I like the name by the way.
    1
  80.  @jsrodman  You're correct that gender dysphoria doesn't equal trans or vice versa. You can look up the DSM5 diagnosis of gender dysphoria or their stats on how many people have it and compare to whatever source you find best for numbers of trans ppl (very roughly 1% of modern trans people are gender dysphoric and more males than females despite there now being more female trans people than male trans people) but I would guess you'd see issues with the diagnosis criteria too (not criticising). I find a logical incoherency in the idea that trans is not a medical problem and that trans people need to get medical aid for being trans. But then for me it's obvious that trans as it is used in the modern West is a socio-cultural identity and therefore not a medical condition. Gender dysphoria is a poorly diagnosed term for the distress but with its problems and for me the best evidence shows that it is, at least at first, treated with holistic care and therapy, the type Abigail wants banned. Particularly given the high number of comorbidities and factors that precede the gender dysphoria (for example autism and childhood abuse) Many of the organisations that are pro-affirmative care today rather paradoxically have moved away from gender dysphoria and towards "embodiment goals". Many, a bit like Abigail, don't feel any diagnosis is required whatsoever and that it should be a matter of give the service user what they want. That to me doesn't make sense. That's not medical healthcare.
    1
  81.  @Preciouspink  Ok let's look at your arguments: You struggle reading. "blah blah" You struggle reading. "I need receipts on that" (Me: "You can look up the DSM5 diagnosis of gender dysphoria or their stats on how many people have it") Inventing ideas that are completely nonsensical and unconnected to anything I wrote " Un encumbered gender dysphoric trans people" (you struggle writing.) You are incapable of reading or understanding studies "Anyone can google detrans and the two top reasons they do it" (there are multiple studies on the issue and only one that trans activists like which is an outlier, I've read them and you have clearly only googled what you wanted) You think a handful of quick paragraphs is some extraordinary feat "to bad you didn’t take this much time on your doctoral thesis." (you have a literacy issue). Your comments on what I said: "Amazing stat!" (you have a numeracy issue) Genuinely that is one of the weakest capitulations I have ever seen. You are so cowardly that you couldn't even touch 99% of what I wrote and the only part where you did was to another person where you screamed about how you can't read.
    1
  82. Love Terry Pratchett. What do you think of the eunuch gender? And how the source Wpath use is a website for men who erm... well like . . . making eunuchs of young boys. I'm sure that sounds made up but it's literally in Wpath SOC 8
    1
  83. Who is dying on the waiting list? The stats from the Tavistock show very low levels of that kind of tragedy, far lower than anorexia for example. The systematic reviews also show that "affirmative care" doesn't help with this either. The only longitudinal studies show higher rates post-op.
    1
  84.  @TomCantDance  I'm not sure this is a genuine request but just in case. S-word by Clinic-Referred Transgender Adolescents in the United Kingdom Michael Biggs 2022 Short: "From 2010 to 2020, four patients were known or suspected to have died by *****e, out of about 15,000 patients". Or longer 2007-2020 4 of over 15000: "The death of any patient—including those on the waiting list—suspected to be ****e is reported to the Tavistock’s Board of Directors. The Tavistock cooperates with a comprehensive surveillance system for every death classified as *****e or (after an open verdict by the coroner) probable *****e in the United Kingdom (National Confidential Inquiry into *******e & H******e by People with Mental Illness, 1999; National Confidential Inquiry into ******e and Safety in Mental Health, 2019). Papers for the Tavistock’s Board meetings are available from April 2007 onwards; those not on the Trust’s website were acquired by a Freedom of Information request. The pdf files of the Agenda and Papers (through September 2021) were searched for the keyword “suicid”; all 442 instances were inspected. From 2007 to 2020, four patients of the GIDS died by suspected *******e: two on the waiting list, in 2016 and 2017; and two after having been seen, in 2017 and 2020. The last case was described as “likely” to be ******e, because the inquest has not yet been held. These figures were confirmed by Freedom of Information requests to the Tavistock. Are you interested in the longitudinal studies showing higher rates post-op?
    1
  85. Claiming they didn't meet any actual LGBT patients is utterly ridiculous because on nearly every other page there is the opinion of a member of the T. The healthcare groups they met with are specifically mentioned. Go read it before making shit up. Can I ask if you're in favour the eunuch gender identity? Are you in favour of transitioning non-verbal autistic children? Are you in favour of transitioning people who have "multiple personalities" with different gender identities? Do you think affirmative care should be centred around "embodiment goals"? What do you think of the Wpath files?
    1
  86.  @KatalepticBoots  Did you notice that all these guys have outsourced their thinking? Not one has an individual thought, they can't formulate their own arguments, they don't dare provide the evidence because they are desperately insecure about providing info they only know someone else said was bad and they subconsciously know that their evidence is piss poor. The best they have is conspiracy rumours and a guy said the thing I agree with without having read Cass in this video/article that I don't dare share because I know you will rip it to shreds. Every time anyone asks for evidence they keep commenting but don't provide it. It's pathetic.
    1
  87.  @saoirse2963  And we will never find out because, given how easy it is to get approval for these things (waiting lists being different), it was probably a very very good reason. I mean the Wpath Files showed these clinicians don't turn down non-verbal autistic kids, people with "multiple personalities", homeless schizophrenics, frankly everyone who isn't having a psychotic episode in the waiting room.
    1
  88.  @classycolas  "Wpath files" It's literally in the comment you're replying to lol. Would you like me to send you to the videos and articles and recordings where they say it? Are you saying Dan Kerasac and Diane Ersenhaft don't exist? This is what happens when you blindly agree with organisations and don't read what they advocate. Use your brain instead of following my comments and screaming your ignorance at me.
    1
  89.  @ReckluseMusic  Just to counter the nonsenes. Not sure if you've read the Cass Review but if you scroll through it then you will see quotes from trans ppl left, right and centre plus numerous specific paragraphs saying this is what this group said, felt etc. And I don't mean they represented trans as one thing, they included a bunch of different trans viewpoints. So those claims about excluding them are dumb as f. The stuff about "conversion therapy" is BS as is the "anti-trans". I've tried my best to follow up the leads and I can find no evidence for those claims except really out there niche articles with no basis. But even then it makes no sense because the University of York carried out a lot of the work independently. It's not like they invented the evidence base. It's not like they came to conclusions wildly different from every single systematic review across Europe. There is so much desperation from these commenters, they really really need it to be some evil cabal. Flat Earthers.
    1
  90.  @jsrodman  Are you genuinely claiming humans can change sex like clownfish? Can you explain to me why, after changing sex, the ones born male still commit more crimes than the ones born female?
    1
  91.  @Aarenby  "Lapines"? Look mate every single point has a number and they are divided into chapters. It's obvious you haven't read it and only copy from articles with the incentive to disparage it. Tell me the chapter or better yet the precise number or just keep talking out of your arse. I didn't see the point where it said something terrible about double blind studies either. Ok so your opinion of the thing you didn't read is that the NHS, which isn't independent (in what sense?) a national body with a clear incentive for health not profit, were vaguely threatened by.... No one..... And for... Nothing. What that has to do with the University of York carrying out a number of studies independently then compiled by an independent person, Cass, I have no idea. Please note, not one trans activist has found fault with any of the studies except when they lie about the methodology and claim 98% got thrown out. No one has ever produced a study and said, hey, this is clearly high quality evidence, why was it removed? You know, why? Because they can't. Every time you guys can't make a single verifiable point you sound so weak and desperate. But all you've got is crying that the results were accurate and therefore resorting to conspiracy theories. It's pathetic
    1
  92.  @Aarenby  Largely irrelevant comment. Is your position that it is or isn't contested? That it is or isn't taught in schools? That it should or should not be taught in schools? Do you think everyone has a "gender identity"? What does that mean? I dare you to have a personal opinion. Otherwise I guess i can assume you can find no fault with anything else I wrote. In UK law when you present something like evolution or climate change then you have to present opposing ideas and let children explore those views (even if it's basically to accept that yes evolution is a thing). Not doing so is illegal. These are also ideas which get explored past primary school when kids are better equipped to explore them. Similarly it is also illegal to present gender identity as factual with no alternative views. We've seen a number of children and teachers punished and reprimanded for not having the "right" views. We have also seen parents denied access to school materials on gender which is, again, illegal. This is because they outsourced their education to some very dodgy third party groups who claim that copyright takes precedence. Luckily we have been able to find materials they use and there is a legal challenge against this. I don't understand why "this isn't happening" and "it is happening and it is good" are extremely common viewpoints in this community. It's like a commitment to cognitive dissonance.
    1
  93.  @caesiumberd  It's more of a threat to post-op trans ppl.
    1
  94.  @itcouldbelupus2842  BTW I asked you to give me examples of where it's wrong and we can see you can't. You're the epitomy of bad faith. Truly representative of the trans ideology.
    1
  95.  @itcouldbelupus2842  I read the laughable one referenced in the video. And a list of "critiques" from the ppl who "critiqued" J K Rowling and the Wpath files. I've also read all the "critiques" here which are: -She be secret super transphobe -They didn't prioritize identity politics in recruiting the best ppl to do the work and went to an excellent university (tbf none of you even realize the university was involved) -She talk to infidels (doctors also doing reviews) -She excluded all poor quality evidence -She excluded all evidence (False) -You guys don't know what a systematic review is and felt very strongly you needed to demonstrate your ignorance in ways that are logically against all such forms of, *checks notes, the best evidence. Here are the criticisms of the actual content of the report -She said she wants to ban everything before 25 (False) Here's the criticism of the evidence -They showed a graph conclusively showing an exponential growth (Already known and not disputed unless you dispute 2+2=4) but she didn't include the graph later. Even though the explanation for that, we can't be sure of figures, is in the report. Otherwise literally nothing in the actual report has been "critiqued" because you all know if we calmly discuss it you have no comeback to simple content. Have you or anyone else on this channel including the interviewers anf interviewees read the original document? Of course not. It would be like reading the Torah. Notice how you personally are incapable of forming your own opinion. I've spoken to maybe 20 ppl on this video. Not one of you has a personal opinion based on the evidence in the actual document. Bunch of intellectual cowards.
    1
  96.  @KatalepticBoots  Well I'm glad you got to see it because it would appear many of my other comments outlining studies or research or findings have suspiciously disappeared. The fragility of this extremist viewpoint is so evident that just reading what respected doctors say is too likely t make it shatter into a thousand pieces.
    1
  97.  @itcouldbelupus2842  Mate, you will be pissed off when I rip it to shreds again. "Would you like me to show you how I outsource my thinking and can't form my own opinion?" If you have an example of the bias then tell me what it is and where the evidence is for it pls. I've already chased up the "conversion therapy advocate" and it is someone who tweeted that someone else is in favour of "gender exploratory therapy" and equates this to "conversion therapy". I know that you guys think that some vague association with doctors connected to Ron De Santis equals bias which is laughable. It's the same old same old guilt by association. Notice how you guys make these appeals to authority but don't actually name names because you know they can get debunked easily. You haven't read the document. The "scientific community" are the ones involved in making the damn thing.
    1
  98.  @AquaSheep93  I think I misspoke. I was possibly thinking about a combination of the previous GRA and what was going before, the history of the words in previous legislation. So fair enough, I'm wrong in terms of how we have it today. I would contend that the original "spirit of the law" was clearly about those who were going to physically transition but the wording is so poor that in leaves it open to anyone and if people disagree with that then maybe they can't paint all politicians as super transphobes who want everyone dead. Do you think the spirit of the law was to let any male who fancied it in? I would like to hear your actual opinion though because you're claiming you aren't advocating for self-id but also taking advantage of it. Are you in favour of self-id or single-sex spaces? Clearly the answer is that you're in favour of you doing what you want. If you identify as a woman then that would suggest you have little understanding of them. You don't understand the purpose of single-sex spaces you seem to think male and female spaces are equal which is obviously false. Your comments about women using male spaces suggests it's largely irrelevant to you. Why not take the path that means fewer males in the women's and therefore keeps them safer?
    1
  99.  @mantistoboggan1503  Fair enough, I was wrong and thinking more about the original intentions of the law. Do you not think the "'gender reasssignment' protected characteristic" is not fit for purpose anyway? Even if we disagree on why I would guess that term is not exactly what most modern trans ppl, who started later than the act, want. It's pretty silly to have that term and have it mean anyone who wants.
    1
  100.  @katywalker8322  Thanks for the info. I think it is terribly defined. Particularly because we have issues with the lack of proper definition of sex or gender in our laws. It at least seems to suggest that they were expecting most of those connected to it to have undergone some kind of medical invention or intend to.
    1
  101.  @katywalker8322  Would you say that there is an expectation they will some day? Honestly the more I read it the more superfluous it all seems to be. I'm a bit surprised it got through based on the wording. But then in 2010 the number of ppl openly identifying as trans was about 1% of what it is today. I think they thought this was just a fringe thing that wouldn't have many wider implications.
    1
  102.  @katywalker8322  I don't get why they ever thought an expectation of possibly in the future would be a solid base for a law. I feel I have as much protection as someone non-trans under this wording if I just feel like manipulating the law. The point where I'd disagree is that single-sex female spaces work by excluding males. There's absolutely zero evidence that trans-identification reduces your likelihood of being a risk. There's evidence that being trans identified increases your risk but for me that's because male predators take advantage (incidentally a lot of trans ideology weirdly defends these men as equally women). Those crime stats are absolutely shocking though. I find the lack of acknowledgement or care for that fact in the "community" a shocking level of cold dead misogyny. Single-sex female spaces are near pointless excepting social stigma if you let in trans identified males. I could make a better statistical argument for letting gay men in on that basis. But that would still lead to increased vulnerability of women. The fact women use male spaces is irrelevant. It's a misunderstanding of the point of single-sex spaces. They are almost exclusively for females. The male space is just a natural extra to that. Every male in a female space statistically increases the threat/risk and objectively makes life worse for women and children who use them. Women make all the trade off for trans identified males. I think if trans identified males really understood women they just morally wouldn't enter. It's like me following a young girl home instead of crossing the road. Or frankly taking advantage of the law to go pee in the ladies. Clearly it makes me safer. I also think ppl focus on bathrooms because it's easier than on the changing rooms where s offenders expose themselves to children based on these rulings or r crisis centres where no male should ever know where such centres are as the only ppl who commit r. Rules where, as someone male, I have equal access to single-sex female spaces as a trans identified male or someone female are just broken and make society far far worse.
    1
  103.  @Aarenby  "the bit where it implies you can double blind hormones" So, nowhere? That doesn't even make sense. Which page? Which section?
    1
  104. But we know that all children aren't permanently trans identifying. So how do you decide who is who? We've seen that puberty blockers have no positive effects on mental health outcomes or s-cide rates. Why did you want them? The best evidence we've got for hormones is basically the wide array of side effects we're starting to realise they cause. Unfortunately the studies claiming positive results don't separate out by sex and don't follow long term but it seems like testosterone gives an initial boost to libido and self-confidence/relieves anxiety which wanes and many trans identified females can't keep taking them due to side effects. With oestrogen there seems to be practically no evidence that they help mental health except that ppl get the "results" they want and some men seem to use them to kill an unwanted sex drive. The issue of waiting list is due to the explosion of trans identifying teen girls. Clearly this is not just because they're all innately trans. The issue is that many get pushed onto gender services and wait not receiving any mental health help in the meantime. It's part of a wider issue of poor mental health among our young ppl. Then they fixate on one "solution" and it becomes difficult to get them to actually take any other steps to alleviate their distress. This is then likely to result in poor long term outcomes because affirmative care has very poor clinical results. Something we have known since 1979 when they showed zero positive improvement.
    1
  105.  @itcouldbelupus2842  Lol I cite the highest quality stuff, I think you forgot that you're the ones complaining that the worst quality evidence wasn't included. Even when most of it was. Unfortunately for you guys the "narrative" of look at everything in context and come to an objective opinion is a real threat to your belief system. Which is why you guys systematically report and censor data that if read could change people's minds. It's why you warn anyone away from going and looking at the evidence for yourselves and why you regurgitate or sometimes don't even read but copy and paste poor quality articles that an average adult sees through easily. In your personal case I can think of few more obvious claimants to the title of most ignorant bigot. To you anyone who doesn't entirely agree with your unreality is a transphobe. People like you have watered down the word "transphobe" (originally coined by a man who disavowed himself of trans ideology before ending his life) to the point of meaningless. So congrats I guess. You might as well say heretic, unbeliever or infidel. What a ludicrous belief system.
    1
  106.  @Aarenby  Can you tell me where this is? I've read it and didn't see this part
    1
  107.  @Shampyon  "only a dozen trans women" yeah compared to only 200 female prisoners mate. That's an incredibly high rate. That is higher than for average males compared to proportion of people making "trans women" the most likely to offend. Also, I notice you have nothing to back that claim up and we know the numbers of "trans women" in prison go up year on year while other groups reduce in number. The study I used showed that they were complaining that males pretended to be women to get into the women's prison system. It 100% says that. So no you either lied or I can add you to my emerging pattern of poor literacy and trans activist correlation stats. It repeatedly has female prisoners mentioning males by different names who are now outside the prison and now "live as men". I count it as roughly half but it's not a statistical study. So please tell me how you got "very few are there for sexual offences" from a qualitative study? Where is that claim coming from except your rear end? The study does however mention "trans women" PDF Files in the women's estate telling other PDF Files to join them. It also mentions "trans women prisoners" who said the reason they came to the women's prison was to "have sex". It also has "trans women prisoners" who stopped taking hormones in order to get erections again. You'd know this if you read it. We also know that in England and Wales the rate of SA amongst "trans women" is around 62% now (See freedom of information requests). Compared to 17% of male and 3% of female prisoners. If this rate is similar in Scotland then there are more "trans women" S offenders than female S offenders in the whole of Scotland. You can go look at Wings over Scotland and see a variety of similar stats such as in New Zealand there are three times as many "trans women" S offenders as female S offenders. Please note that I am putting "trans women" but by your ideology these are just women. Your ideology connect trans women with S offenses. "Your kind of argument is extremely common on the anti-trans side. You've relied on people not bothering to check your shit." Rich from someone who didn't read past the title of the study. Seriously mate, why are you arguing that the males who self-id into women's prisons are all trans women? Why not just disavow them?
    1
  108.  @darrens3  The only longitudinal studies we have show the risk of -cide goes up post-op. Then the Cass Review and Finland, Sweden, Norway, France, everyone who has done a systematic review also show no evidence of this so-called "lifesaving treatment" Despite your claims of hundreds dying it's actually 4/15000. This is a figure far lower than that of anorexia. Well no, 2/15000, the other 2 on affirmative care. A recent study showing how great affirmative care is for -cide risk had 2/315 after cherry picking. The original Dutch protocol (which the Tavistock reproduced and got negative mental health outcomes for) had at least 2 deaths out of 70. Have a guess how many of those original 70 were same-sex attracted btw.
    1
  109.  @classycolas  69/70 trans identified kids in the original study weren't. Absolutely brain dead comment
    1
  110.  @Aarenby  How can the Wpath Files be a hoax when they are literally documents that are from Wpath? You can even just read SOC8 by Wpath it is verging on insanity in places. What do you think a hoax is?
    1
  111.  @itcouldbelupus2842  Mate why do you keep asking this question, get a thousand different examples of how, then write it again? Is your short term memory that bad?
    1