Jump to content
  • Sign up for free and receive a month's subscription

    You are viewing this page as a guest. That means you are either a member who has not logged in, or you have not yet registered with us. Signing up for an account only takes a minute and it means you will no longer see this annoying box! It will also allow you to get involved with our friendly(ish!) community and take part in the discussions on our forums. And because we're feeling generous, if you sign up for a free account we will give you a month's free trial access to our subscriber only content with no obligation to commit. Register an account and then send a private message to @dave u and he'll hook you up with a subscription.

Transgender stuff - what's going on?


Gym Beglin
 Share

Recommended Posts

6 hours ago, Rico1304 said:


You’d think the Cass report would bring some humility.  Even if it was ‘Perhaps they were right about the blockers at least’. Nope.  Double down. 

Double down on what?

 

I haven't read the Cass report.  I know a lot of people are making a lot of noise about it (and I'd bet my favourite bollock that most of them haven't read it either).  I came across Hilary Cass answering questions about it, so I correctly judged that it fits the brief of this thread title.

 

Then you started talking about "senior Scottish politicians" that nobody outside Scotland has heard of.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, AngryOfTuebrook said:

Double down on what?

 

I haven't read the Cass report.  I know a lot of people are making a lot of noise about it (and I'd bet my favourite bollock that most of them haven't read it either).  I came across Hilary Cass answering questions about it, so I correctly judged that it fits the brief of this thread title.

 

Then you started talking about "senior Scottish politicians" that nobody outside Scotland has heard of.

Nope.  That’s not what happened.  You found a TA groups interpretation of an interview quoted by Billy Bragg.  No direct quotes.  You ignored the fact the woman has been told she’s not safe to travel on public transport. 
 

Read the report, then you don’t have to rely on anyone else. 
 

You’ve never heard of Kite before yesterday but believe them. It’s not my fault you haven’t heard of these people.  Yesterday it was “nobody”, now it’s nobody you’ve heard of. Goalposts shifting all the time. 

  • Downvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I really haven't missed your tiresome routine of pretending other people have posted stuff, when what they actually posted is still there for people to read.

 

 

 

If anyone intelligent is still reading this, Dr Cass's comments on the Cass Report are an interesting addition to any rational, informed debate.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 21/04/2024 at 09:42, AngryOfTuebrook said:

IMG_20240421_093659.jpg

IMG_20240421_093720.jpg

IMG_20240421_093800.jpg

 

 

No lies in that thread, as far as what you've posted. Said a while ago that it seems some people are more interested in leveraging the report to make points about things not in the report, than actually seeing improvement across these services.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Pidge said:

No lies in that thread, as far as what you've posted. Said a while ago that it seems some people are more interested in leveraging the report to make points about things not in the report, than actually seeing improvement across these services.

Lies by omission.  
 

Cass can’t say PBs are dangerous because there’s a lack of data and research.  In that scenario, where any normal person would demand proof of safety BEFORE giving them to children this is being framed as a win!?  TRAs have been pushing them for years, that was called out for years but anyone questioning it was labelled a bigot. 

  • Downvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 20/02/2024 at 12:43, Pidge said:

How would hitting a woman outside of your household be 'domestic abuse'? It would be assault then and now regardless of who did it. It's also not what's happened in the clip, the player in white has the ball and the player in black commits a foul trying to tie it up, getting whipped around as they fight for the ball. The refs calls it early to try and avoid the confrontation, should probably have considered a flagrant or tech if they feel the player in white is being overly aggressive after the whistle. Being ejected a few times to protect players should put a stop to it, especially if it starts costing them games.

 

Not convinced that individual should be allowed in the game in the first place, as I don't know anything about them, but also not seeing any evidence of one player abusing or assaulting three people.

The player in white (who has a full beard) has now been suspended from a rowing club for sexually harassment after comments made in the female changing rooms. 
 

If you wait long enough…

  • Upvote 1
  • Downvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

43 minutes ago, Rico1304 said:

The player in white (who has a full beard) has now been suspended from a rowing club for sexually harassment after comments made in the female changing rooms. 
 

If you wait long enough…

 

Doesn't alter a single thing I said.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

49 minutes ago, Rico1304 said:

Lies by omission.  
 

Cass can’t say PBs are dangerous because there’s a lack of data and research.  In that scenario, where any normal person would demand proof of safety BEFORE giving them to children this is being framed as a win!?  TRAs have been pushing them for years, that was called out for years but anyone questioning it was labelled a bigot. 

 

They will still be available under certain conditions, which they would not be if they were deemed unsafe.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Pidge said:

 

They will still be available under certain conditions, which they would not be if they were deemed unsafe.

As part of research, or continued for kids already on them.  
 

Edit - if the research says they are either unsafe or ineffective what would be your reaction to them being prescribed without evidence? 

  • Downvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Rico1304 said:

As part of research, or continued for kids already on them.  
 

Edit - if the research says they are either unsafe or ineffective what would be your reaction to them being prescribed without evidence? 

I wouldn't expect them to be on offer at that point to any new patients. Not sure about existing ones.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share


×
×
  • Create New...