@OneFaintingRobin

1 month ago

I don't think your discussion over the Cass Review was terrible, but I do feel like, as a conversation ultimately happening between two cis people, you have missed a couple of the nuances and importantly, potential dogwhistles, that have been the focus of the response from the trans community around this. Firstly, the review's suggestion that their isn't enough evidence is, to be very clear, a lie. The review discounted 98% of the studies submitted, the vast majority (if not all) of which were reputable, peer-reviewed studies, that absolutely provided evidence that transition, social and medical, have overwhelmingly positive impacts and drastically improve the quality of life of trans people, especially trans kids. They were discounted on the basis of not being 'high-quality studies', which in this case effectively means that they weren't double-blind - something which, in these sort of areas, would cover the whole range from being generally unethical (i.e. forcing a trans kid to not socially transition to engineer a controlled study on social transition) to functionally impossible (i.e. a double-blind procedure on hormone blockers or HRT, as it would quickly become obvious who had the actual medication as they diverged in terms of puberty/development). This allowed the study to present the idea that there is no substantial evidence, but they were only able to do that because they ignored all of the evidence. The evidence is there, it is agreed upon by the majority of experts in the field, and this review has chosen to ignore that evidence. Incidentally, the evidence for the 'brain isn't developed until 25' thing is much, much less clear... Secondly, it's important to note that there are huge question over Hillary Cass in particular - the fact that, even before this review started, there's evidence of her being involved with prominent anti-trans activists, and groups like Transgender Trend. She was never an impartial figure, and there's significant evidence, however diplomatic her wording in the review might have been, that she very much comes from a place of anti-trans ideology. This is reinforced by the fact that actual trans people were prevented from giving substantial input on the review due to 'bias', but anti-trans voices WERE allowed to contribute. Thirdly, you are absolutely right that trans kids (all trans people, actually) should be able to access therapy services to help them through their transition, but you have seemed to miss exactly why trans people and our allies are very on-edge about that suggestion - especially with anti-trans voices being present in this review. There is, especially under this government, a very credible concern that 'therapy' will ultimately prove to focus on the area of 'Gender Exploratory Therapy'; it's a friendly name, but in practice, we've seen that it largely amounts to trying to convince trans people (especially kids) that their dysphoria is in fact something else entirely, and is generally considered within the community to be a form of conversion therapy. Under a more trans-friendly government - hell, even Theresa May's government I'd trust a bit more on this - the idea of a more holistic, therapy-inclusive transition pathway wouldn't be a bad thing, but under a VISCIOUSLY anti-trans government (and an oncoming Labour government that isn't showing itself to be much better), we have every reason to be very concerned about exactly what kind of therapy they'd be insisting these kids go through. I know that you both have your hearts in the right place. Plenty of what you talk about, from the comments on trans healthcare, to the fearmongering the media have stirred up, to the way that a handful of criminals is being used to justify attacking our rights, is great. I appreciate you trying to tackle this issue. But I do feel like you should have AT LEAST spent more time than it feels like you did on reading and understanding why the response to this review from the trans community has been so strong, and so scared - and let me be clear, as a trans woman living in this country, it feels like every day is something new to be scared of at the moment. And, really, even if it meant kicking this issue to later in the week, this conversation needed to include a trans voice. I appreciate that production-wise that might be easier said than done, but without it, no matter how much I can tell you're on our side, this is ultimately one more conversation about what trans people need and are, without us being present to actually verbalise what we need and who we are.

124 |