Glinner has the same problem, with whatever money he gets to keep from the divorce anyway.
Transgender rights discussion
- Thread starter crappycraperson
- Start date
-
In the latest episode of the United Hour Podcast, Nik (@Rood) is joined by CEO Duncan Drasdo and Financial Director Andy Green from the Manchester United Supporters Trust for a special episode on all things behind the scenes at Old Trafford including a brief history of MUST and their aims today, views on INEOS and Sir Jim Ratcliffe so far, and the Old Trafford regeneration.
Most people voted for Brexit.
THAT is what you worry about? Odd hill to die on.
I'd say it is easier to just use man or woman (CIS or trans) in almost all circumstances as barring political discussion it usually doesn't need to stated or clarified imo. And the term girl is a bit problematic as it is often used in a way that can be rather sexist e.g. calling women girls.
The "why do you care?" argument is not convincing. Lots of things don't have to affect me or you personally, but we can still have an opinion on it. Gay marriage doesn't affect me personally, but I can still think it should be legal and tell conservatives to feck off.
And I'll repeat: we make fun of incels for using the word "female" to describe women.
Nevertheless, no one is preventing people from using the word "women", I get that. I just find it funny how people now think words like woman or girl are "problematic".
I know the implication is that most people are stupid and therefore too stupid to be at the frontiers of gender ideology, but to be honest I dont think most people spend a lot time thinking about it, for most, what a man is or what is woman is already defined through our experiences and conditioning through our childhood.
I'm wondering why that specific bit of language discussion is of any concern? Not like anyone is going to make you use it. And if you don't the worse case is you end up calling a hot trans woman a hot woman. Which I doubt she would mind, unless you were a leering whistling feckwit about it. I'd guess that calling women girls is more "problematic" than calling CIS and/or trans women, women.
And I'm unaware of why incels would (or wouldn't) want to call women women. I tend to make fun of them for being sad, sexist, rapey, inadequate who displace said inadequacy onto others.
I was saying that what most people think (common knowledge, common sense) is a terrible metric by which to discuss such things. Stupidity is common, but laziness and a lack of critical thinking ability is far more of a problem imo.
I was a bit surprised this didnt cause a bump.
https://www.gov.uk/government/news/new-restrictions-on-puberty-blockers
https://www.gov.uk/government/news/new-restrictions-on-puberty-blockers
Less than 38% of people voted for Brexit.
Most people voted for Brexit or were too stupid to vote at all.
Better?
It will never be better
Now I'm sad as wellIt will never be better
This is a blatent attack on the trans community and is horrific, the powers used to create this haven't been used for around 25 years, isn't something did on a whim, this was done as a deliberate attack. If these blockers were harmful, they shouldn't be used at all for any treatment, yet here we are being told that they are safe for delaying puberty for some people, but not others?? The fact they are even making it a criminal offense to own them is beyond me. Thankfully it's only a 3 month order
What we do know is that since the Bell v Tavistock case up at least 20 young trans kids have taken there own lives due to being refused treatment, prior to that we'd not lost a single one for many a year. This government, the anti trans brigade have blood on there hands and hopefully some parent will take legal action against those involved personally.
They've allowed this country who were once leaders in not only lgbtq+ rights and care to become a third world nation, where the next target is abortion. With the election coming up, these dishonest cranks will no longer be in power and hopefully most of them won't even be in Parliment at all.
I think I already explained this to you? Maybe it was to someone else. There’s a big difference between delaying puberty in someone who is experiencing it inappropriately early (an approved use for these medicines) and delaying it in someone who would otherwise go through puberty at a normal age. This ban applies in the latter scenario and will be removed as soon as there’s solid evidence that the benefits of delayed puberty for these patients outweigh the risks. Which is a reasonable thing to do in any scenario where there’s insufficient evidence to justify a medical intervention.
No difference what so ever, what's the difference between delaying puberty for someone with early onset puberty and someone who's trans? Nothing, it's not like they are using the drugs for life an use them over a similar time frame. Evidence is out there, just that Cass decided not to use it as instructed by the ministers who are now banning the treatments.
By introducing this ban, they are stopping the new gender clinics that they set up to replace the Tavistock in Liverpool and London from prescribing them to patients who have agreed to take part in the study that Cass decided she wanted undertaken. So how will the evidence that she has determind that is further needed to prove the benfits going to be gained? I wouldn't mind there's no evidence to suggest it's harmful, use of blockers are reversable after time, that's been proven.
I'll say it now this Tory government is treating Trans kids and trans people like the Nazi's treated lgbtq people in the 30's. It's a good job they'll be gone soon or the rest of the lgbtq+ community will be under fire.
By introducing this ban, they are stopping the new gender clinics that they set up to replace the Tavistock in Liverpool and London from prescribing them to patients who have agreed to take part in the study that Cass decided she wanted undertaken. So how will the evidence that she has determind that is further needed to prove the benfits going to be gained? I wouldn't mind there's no evidence to suggest it's harmful, use of blockers are reversable after time, that's been proven.
I'll say it now this Tory government is treating Trans kids and trans people like the Nazi's treated lgbtq people in the 30's. It's a good job they'll be gone soon or the rest of the lgbtq+ community will be under fire.
Surely that’s obvious? The concerns are around the consequences of having puberty abnormally late. Which is not an issue when early puberty is delayed. Risks aside, the other unknown is whether use in trans kids actually produces a long term benefit.
Nonsense. This ban doesn’t prevent them being prescribed in the context of a clinical trial. It just means that this is now the only way they will be prescribed. Which is exactly the approach taken with all other medicines that are not licensed to treat the condition they’re being used to treat.
If the study generates evidence that it’s an intervention where the benefits outweigh the risks then they can be prescribed more widely. That’s just good medicine.
Good