f_c_dundee

Me too and I opened a feckin beer for this Bairn looking inpatient and demanding she's still staying up if they restart it.

They kicked a ball right enough.

It is a wee bit of a minter

It's... Slightly damp eh

According to Mexican Twitterers they call him "Toño" Portales. Wee bit of unexpected entertainment for a Friday.

Branding people And? Never even heard of it. Are there? Did you ask many women? It are you assuming that you represent women even better than me? The main threat in the stuff you posted seemed to be not feeling welcome, about 16% was actual assault or harassment. Surveys in the UK have consistently shown that when you spell out to women that you're talking about men (many still get confused that transwomen are women identifying as trans) and that the vast, vast majority retain their genitals, they do not agree that they would welcome them into their spaces. Men tend to match this pattern.

That's icky objectifying of women, f**k all to do with being trans. I've referred to AGP behaviour obliquely maybe twice in total in all these posts, do you want to discuss it more?

duh she was an artist before this. if people don't like her ore recent designs, I'm sure they won't buy them.

yeah i did to be fair, got confused. Then laughed my ass off when I saw you had given us a link from Julia Serrano. Nice. Have a nice quote people.

so...they're doing this activism to make money off t-shirts?

A self-reported survey of teenagers and a discussion paper about the survey results? That's it?

Yes I know, I looked hence my comments. That's your idea, you made it up. Waiting lists are not gate keeping or a careful assessment. Huh? Merch? I was responding to your comment about money. If it's about merch and YouTubers I don't even know what's the relevance at all now.

No it's not, it's nothing like it. It's insulting to the people whose past misery you're trying to co-opt into this. All it would take would be for men to ignore the transwomen and get on with their day. As in men accept the non conformity in their space. "No evidence that it's a problem for women" Evidence is not limited to men prosecuted for specific crimes you know. Many women clearly have a problem with it and are entitled to disagree with being told to budge up and accept these men in their facilities and groups. Speaking of evidence, there must be a whole lot of it showing all the terrible issues transwomen had in male facilities?

I am fairly sure I have tried to address it, I will try again. The 1% figure is from retrospective reviews, of data going back years, yes? Literally back to the 80s at least. I am pretty sure it includes some of 'The Dutch Study' which had very specific selection criteria - the teenagers involved all had dysphoria from a young age which remained or intensified at puberty and they had to have no other pre-existing mental health difficulties. So not really representative of todays transgender population - back then it was a relatively rare thing to be dysphoric about your sex and predominantly affected boys who had been suffering these feelings since early childhood. Unlike the predominant group now of girls and young women, who in some cases had no history of dysphoria at all until entering puberty. Clearly providers are also not taking comorbidities into consideration, preferring to assume that they are caused by the distress of being trans, even if the young person had these difficulties before questioning their gender/sex. In some of the studies included, the participants who had medical or surgical transition were also given psychotherapy or some other intervention, with no way to differentiate what any improvement was attributable to. Lastly, so many patients have been lost to follow up that longer term data is unavailable or very limited. There has been no willingness to do a quality study on this, perhaps because like in the Tavistock study, the researchers admitted that they thought they would struggle for participants if they had a chance to be in a 'no intervention' control group. Plus the fact that who was in the control group would become physically obvious to all over time. It's impossible to use a few retrospective data reviews to keep repeating the 1% figure, when we can see that the picture is changing all the time. Regret rates were much lower in the past when there was much more 'gatekeeping' (or careful assessment) of who would be offered such treatment. Check it out, I didn't even try and slander or discredit the people involved in the papers you cited. Mad eh! And oh my word I missed any and all of your Dawson Park Boy drama, amazingly I don't depend on getting excited about who said what. Plus wtf there's no money being made by the gender clinics?

I don't really want game on though. I just found it hard to see the untruths repeated on here when I blundered into this thread. All the things constantly being posted, have been responded to - but no real consideration seems to be given. The response options seem to be: Dismissed because 'bigots'. Post random tweet from 'GC mob' to divert discussion. Additionally assume that if I agree with 1 thing a person has said, I therefore agree with everything, so share some dumb thing they said as well for discrediting purposes. Accuse poster of random unrelated belief because we are all crazy right wingers. Personal insults about why I care or why I am spending time on this. (plus weeks of being accused of being a troll who just signed up, despite evidence to the contrary). Deny repeatedly that surgery is ever performed on minors, despite evidence to the contrary. (Also conflate with other cosmetic surgery, as if I would think that was a fine idea. ) I believe it's important to challenge these untruths, as so many years have been spent spreading misinformation and poorly researched ideas. Also suppressing both the discussion and further research, to actually help provide evidence based care for distressed people. I don't want to 'win', the people being harmed deserve proper consideration in my opinion.

Even the NHS quietly removed claims of reversibility over a year ago. Why lie? We have no idea of the effect on brain development of interfering with puberty in this way and we do know that bone density is affected leaving some young people with early osteoporosis. In children with early/precocious puberty, they're on the drug for as short a time as possible. They still suffer side effects and consideration is given to the balance of harm involved. The idea is that they still go through puberty as normally as possible though. Completely blocking puberty at a young age is not the same thing! Having no development of sexual organs or function might possibly affect you in future, I would think? In the Tavistock data very few children stopped and allowed puberty to continue. They went straight on to cross sex hormones either in children or adult services. You know fine well it's girls predominantly affected at the moment - a 5000% increase was seen compared to earlier years when numbers shot up. No this isn't explained by them being free to express themselves either. Careful medical standards my arse - there's no good quality data for benefits and zero long term data to show outcomes on brain development either. (Precocious puberty studies not the same thing, before you try that again. ) How can you be just parroting this stuff repeatedly without checking into it? Even social transition has been shown not to be a neutral act, as it can solidify the dysphoric feelings and children can find it hard to tell people of they don't feel that way any more. (See Cass report). Like I said, fewer and fewer people are now prepared to go along with this without question, so hopefully the harm will not continue at this level.

Scottish data, UK data, even go to European data. 99% of all sex crime carried out by male perpetrators, 80% at least of the victims are female. What's hard to comprehend about that? Call me a pearl clutcher all you like, zero fucks given for your women specific insults. You can't shout everyone down with bigot and transphobe anymore, didn't you notice? Maybe try facts not "shut up men are totally women cos I say so". I responded to every single one of your points you absolute turnip. (aka rutabaga if that helps). You are the one saying nothing.

Calm down. You sound a bit hysterical there. It's worrying. Must be posting all the things that have already been shown to be total bobbins on this very thread. Maybe have a wee sherry and a lie down. PS Mack Beggins shouldn't have been allowed to wrestle as a female due to the testosterone doping. Nor as a male in case of injury. I'd have thought that was obvious if you weren't apoplectic at the time. Men in female sport is, as I'm sure you know but pretend not to, wrong mainly due to the effect of hormones during puberty, not a spot check before a race. Every level set so far for testosterone is way above average female levels *anyway*. Women have historically not had a problem with lesbians in their spaces, because they're women. I actually can't believe you're clueless enough to wheel out the "oh noes what about the dangerous lecherous lesbians" nonsense, fksake. That's it. Even women identifying as men don't suddenly grow from 5ft 4 to 6ft. They're not a disproportionate risk to women, if asked women don't care in general. Yes anyone who looks extremely masculine might get a double take, but if anything this has been made worse by the push for self id as more people are aware that men think they are entitled to access. Men should stay out. No matter how they identify. Women are not a human shield for transwomen. I've actually seen zero actual evidence of transwomen being hassled or harmed in male facilities. Even if they are, then that's a man problem. Men should accept gender non conforming men more readily. The data actually shows that the risk of voyeurism and covert recording is greatly increased in unisex facilities. See the wheens of men arrested at swimming pools and leisure centres and store fitting rooms with phone footage. You can keep repeating lies if it makes you feel better. But fewer and fewer people are falling for it. Fewer and fewer are scared of being told off. It's not at all about offending my beliefs or the purity of the language. It's just a fact that men are a higher risk as a population and that irreversible medical treatment on children, teenagers and even young adults has no good science whatsoever to support it as a first line treatment. Even on adults surgery is highly risky.

Day of signings!

Nonsense. I cba going back through all my posts, but 0% have mentioned the ick factor ffs. You have either made that up in your own head, or are, again talking about something someone that's not on this forum has said. The extrapolated it to assume everyone believes it if they disagree . Utter, Utter, bobbins. Feel free to elaborate on how the debate was lost years ago though, that would be interesting.

Yup, but being as you're chatting with Scottish football fans, not Nazis or the Russian federation, feel free to engage on that basis.

Yes it is a core belief. They still exist quite obviously, but cannot expect the entire world to consider them as the opposite sex any time they want for any purpose. Not without consequences which cannot be hand waved away. That's it.