I have pulled this update forward due to ongoing dramatic developments in Scotland which may give hope to the Scottish Terfs!
No 28 in the Leading Female Season is especially for my gay male readers, namely Barbara Streisand in Funny Girl.
Set in and around New York City just before and following World War I, the story opens with Ziegfeld Follies star Fanny Brice ( Streisand) awaiting her husband, Nick Arnstein (Omar Sharif) to arrive at the theatre, and then moves into an extended flashback focusing on their meeting, marriage, and Fanny's rise to stardom.
Cass Review
I seriously wonder if there has been a reverse ferret change of tack at the Guardian. They have now published this article by Dr David Bell, one of the original Tavistock Clinic whistle blowers!
Anyway, great article!
The Cass review of gender identity services marks a return to reason and evidence – it must be defended (26 April)
As the dust settles around Hilary Cass’s report – the most extensive and thoroughgoing evidence-based review of treatment for children experiencing gender distress ever undertaken – it is clear her findings support the grave concerns I and many others have raised. Central here was the lack of an evidential base of good quality that could back claims for the effectiveness of young people being prescribed puberty blockers or proceeding on a medical pathway to transition. I and many other clinicians were concerned about the risks of long-term damaging consequences of early medical intervention. Cass has already had to speak out against misinformation being spread about her review, and a Labour MP has admitted she “may have misled” Parliament when referring to it. The review should be defended from misrepresentation.
The policy of “affirmation” – that is, speedily agreeing with a child that they are of the wrong gender – was an inappropriate clinical stance brought about by influential activist groups and some senior gender identity development service (Gids) staff, resulting in a distortion of the clinical domain. Studies indicate that a majority of children in the absence of medical intervention will desist – that is, change their minds.
The many complex problems that affect these young people were left unaddressed once they were viewed simplistically through the prism of gender. Cass helpfully calls this “diagnostic overshadowing”. Thus children suffered thrice over: through not having all their problems properly addressed; by being put on a pathway for which there is not adequate evidence and for which there is considerable risk of harm; and lastly because children not unreasonably believed that all their problems would disappear once they transitioned. It is, I think, not possible for a child in acute states of torment to be able to think through consequences of a future medical transition. Children struggle to even imagine themselves in an adult sexual body.
Some claim that low numbers of puberty blockers were prescribed. Cass quotes figures showing around 30% of Gids patients in England discharged between April 2018 and 31 December 2022 were referred to the endocrinology service, of whom around 80% were prescribed puberty blockers; the proportion was higher for older children. But these numbers are likely to be an underestimate, as 70% of children were transferred to adult services once they were 17, and their data lost, as very regrettably they were not followed up. This is one of the most serious governance problems of Gids – also specifically addressed by the judges in Keira Bell v Tavistock. Six adult gender clinics refused to cooperate and provide data to Cass. However, having come under considerable pressure, they have now relented.
It is often claimed that puberty blockers were not experimental, as there is a long history of their use. They had been used in precocious puberty (for example where a child, sometimes because of a pituitary abnormality, develops secondary sexual characteristics before the age of eight) and in the treatment of prostate cancer. But they had not been prescribed by Gids to children experiencing gender dysphoria before 2011. The lack of long-term evidence underlies the decision of the NHS to put an end to their routine prescription for children as a treatment for gender dysphoria – that is, for those whose bodies were physically healthy.
The attempts of Gids clinicians to raise concerns about safeguarding and the medical approach were ignored or worse.The then medical director heard concerns but did not act; ditto the Speak up Guardian and the Tavistock and Portman NHS foundation trust management. I was a senior consultant psychiatrist, and it was in my role as staff representative on the trust council of governors that a large number of the Gids clinicians approached me with their grave concerns. This formed the basis of the report submitted to the board in 2018. The trust then conducted a “review” of Gids, based only on interviewing staff. The CEO stated that the review did not identify any “failings in the overall approach taken by the service in responding to the needs of the young people and families who access its support”. I was threatened with disciplinary action. When the child safeguarding lead, Sonia Appleby, raised her concerns before the trust’s review, the trust threatened her with an investigation; and its response, as an employment tribunal later confirmed, damaged her professional reputation and stood in the way of her safeguarding work.
Characterising a child as “being transgender” is harmful as it forecloses the situation and also implies that this is a unitary condition for which there is unitary “treatment”. It is much more helpful to use a description: that the child suffers from distress in relation to gender/sexuality, and this needs to be carefully explored in terms of the narrative of their lives, the presence of other difficulties such as autism, depression, histories of abuse and trauma, and confusion about sexuality. As the Cass report notes, studies suggest that a high proportion of these children are same-sex attracted, and many suffer from homophobia. Concerned gay and lesbian clinicians have said they experienced homophobia in the service, and that staff worked in a “climate of fear”.
It is misleading to suggest that I and others who have raised these concerns are hostile to transgender people – we believe they should be able to live their lives free of discrimination, and we want them to have safe, evidence-based holistic healthcare. What we have opposed is the precipitate placing of children on a potentially damaging medical pathway for which there is considerable evidence of risk of harm. We emphasised the need, before taking such steps, to spend considerable time exploring this complex and multifaceted clinical presentation. Young people and clinicians routinely refer to “top surgery” and “bottom surgery”, terms that serve to seriously underplay these major surgical procedures, ie double mastectomy, removal of pelvic organs and fashioning of constructed penis or vagina. These procedures carry very serious risks such as urinary incontinence, vaginal atrophy, cardiovascular complications and many others we are only beginning to learn about. There is a very serious risk of sexual dysfunction and sterility.
There are no reliable studies (for children or adults) that could support claims of low levels of regret. The studies often quoted (eg Bustos et al 2021) have been criticised for using inadequate and erroneous data. The critical issue here is the fact that children and young people who were put on a medical pathway were not followed up. Studies suggest that the majority of detransitioners, a growing population, who are having to deal with the consequences of having been put on a medical pathway, do not return to the clinics as they are very fearful of the consequences. The fact that there are no dedicated NHS services for detransitioners is symptomatic of the NHS’s lack of concern for this group. Many live very lonely and isolated lives.
Those who say a child has been “born in the wrong body”, and who have sidelined child safeguarding, bear a very heavy responsibility. Parents have been asked “Do you want a happy little girl or a dead little boy?” Cass notes that rates of suicidality are similar to rates among non-trans identified youth referred to child and adolescent mental health services (CAMHS). Indeed, the NHS lead for suicide prevention, Prof Sir Louis Appleby, has said “invoking suicide in this debate is mistaken and potentially harmful”.
It has been suggested that the Cass report sought to “appease” various interests, with the implication that those who have promoted these potentially damaging treatments have been sidelined. But in reality, it is those of us who have raised these concerns who have been silenced by trans rights activists who have had considerable success in closing down debate, including preventing conferences going ahead. Doctors and scientists have said that they have been deterred from conducting studies in this area by a climate of fear, and faced great personal costs for speaking out, ranging from harassment to professional risks and even, as Cass has experienced, safety concerns in public.
The pendulum is already swinging towards a reassertion of rationality. Cass’s achievement is to give that pendulum a hugely increased momentum. In years to come we will look back at the damage done to children with incredulity and horror.
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2024/apr/26/cass-review-gender-identity-services-report
Bye Bye, Humza?
Things are developing apace in Scotland following the Cass Review and the Sandyford Clinic in Glasgow pausing the prescription of puberty blockers. The Scottish National Party (SNP) have withdrawn from their coalition agreement with the fruit loop Scottish Greens. The Scottish Tories then tabled a no confidence vote in SNP leader, Humza Yousaf. There were rumours that he had resigned but this proved not to be the case. The Greens then said they would vote against him in this vote.
There are 129 Scottish MPs (SMPs) but you can discount the presiding officer ( the equivalent of the Speaker in The House of Commons). So the 128 consist of:
63 SNP
31 Tory
22 Labour
7 Green
4 Liberal Democrats
1 Alba ( Ash Regan)
So, aside from the SNP SMPs , of course, if the Tories, Labour, the Greens and the Lib Dems vote in favour of the no confidence motion, that will leave Ash Regan with the casting vote!
Obviously the hope of Scottish Terfs will be that, one way or the other, Mr Useless will be ousted as the SNP Leader and perhaps replaced by Kate Forbes who opposed the Gender Recognition Reform Bill ( though she remains standing by him at the moment). Hope springs eternal!
Neil Pooran in The Independent ( Scottish Greens to vote against Humza Yousaf in confidence motion 25 April) reports:
Patrick Harvie and Lorna Slater - ummm, nice trousers! © PA Wire
The Scottish Greens will vote against Humza Yousaf in a vote of no confidence after the First Minister pulled out of the powersharing Bute House Agreement.
Lorna Slater, co-leader of the Scottish Greens, told the PA news agency: “We no longer have confidence in a progressive Government in Scotland doing the right thing for climate and nature.”
The full article is here:
August Graham in The Independent ( Humza Yousaf remains First Minister of Scotland 26 April) reports:
I’d keep the hard hat on if I was you, Humza © PA Wire
Users of social media site X, including an account belonging to a social media personality, have claimed that Scotland’s First Minister Humza Yousaf has resigned from his post.
One social media user claimed “Humza Yousaf has resigned,” while another posted “this moron just lost his job as leader of Scotland,” with an accompanying video of Mr Yousaf.
Evaluation: False
As of the time of writing at 3.49pm on April 26, Mr Yousaf is still in his post as First Minister.
He has also insisted that he will not resign, despite facing a vote of no confidence in his leadership.
The facts
Mr Yousaf’s administration was thrown into difficulty on Thursday after he said that he was ending the Bute House Agreement, a power-sharing deal between the Scottish National Party and the Scottish Greens which has been in place for nearly three years.
Mr Yousaf is facing a possible no confidence vote in Holyrood, the Scottish Parliament. However he was still First Minister at the time of writing.
He has also told Sky News early on Friday afternoon that he plans to fight the no confidence motion and will not resign.
“First Minister, are you going to resign?” Mr Yousaf was asked.
“No, I intend absolutely to fight that vote of no confidence,” he said.
The full article is here:
And to help you work your way through the madness, here is Wings Over Scotland:
https://wingsoverscotland.com/the-labyrinth-of-stupidity/#more-143890
And for a marvellous, excoriating and ( as ever) very entertaining demolition of the Scottish Greens here is Malcolm Clark on his excellent substack:
The Greens: Too Crazy Even for Humza
The Greens were expelled from government by the SNP for being too bonkers; even for them. They leave behind a trail of lunacy; and not just on gender. It's time to ditch their entire mad agenda.
APR 25, 2024
When the SNP Cabinet brought the power-sharing Agreement with the Scottish Greens to an end, yesterday, I’m reliably informed, there were loud cheers and thumping of fists on the table.
The move is cathartic for a party that has been on the back foot for months and grown increasingly sick of the ideological obsessions of the Greens. These may well be the same obsessions that gripped whatever passes for a soul in its ex-leader Nicola Sturgeon but they are being rapidly consigned to the past by the SNP, a party that’s now desperate to dump the baggage of her era.
How things have changed. When Nicola Sturgeon brought the Greens into government in a power-sharing agreement in August 2021 many assumed it was some sort of diversity scheme to give people with serious behavioural problems the opportunity to integrate at the workplace.
I know we’re not supposed to joke about mental health now and quite right too. On the other hand look where that got us. Three pathological fruitcakes running a country into the ground while barking at the rest of us about pronouns.
The full piece is here:
Title IX
See my previous piece about the disastrous changes to Title IX in the States:
The Foundation Against Racism and Intolerance writes:
FAIR News: Title IX's Shift and What It Means for Women's Sex-Based Rights
Newsletter
APR 26, 2024
On April 19, 2024, the U.S. Department of Education released its final regulations under Title IX, which will take effect on August 1, 2024. These extensive revisions are likely to significantly affect students across K-12 and higher education, particularly in public and federally-funded private institutions.
You may recall that FAIR previously filed public comments on two proposed Title IX rules: one governs sex-based discrimination in educational programs in general; and the other governs sex-based discrimination in the context of sports. You can read those public comments here and here. In order to provide a timely update to our community, we have drafted an info sheet on the Final Rule, which includes our brief explanation of the history of Title IX, as well as the portions of the Final Rule that we feel will be of the greatest interest to our members.
Originally designed to combat sex-based discrimination, Title IX's new scope now includes protections against discrimination based on gender identity. This shift away from the Act's original framework raises significant concerns about the implications for sex-segregated spaces and activities, potentially requiring schools to allow access based on gender identity rather than biological sex.
Key changes include possible compelled speech regarding preferred gender pronouns, integration of sex-specific facilities, and significantly less robust due process protections for students accused of discrimination. These issues touch on deep legal and ethical questions, particularly regarding safeguarding women’s rights and protecting freedom of speech.
We will explore these topics further in a webinar on April 30 from 6-7pm ET with experts in law, education, and civil rights. We encourage you to participate and bring your insights as we discuss the comprehensive impact of these new rules. You can register for this free virtual event here.
In light of the new Title IX regulations, FAIR is exploring a host of legal advocacy projects aimed at upholding the constitutional rights of all students, and we need your help! If you or someone you know is concerned about the changes to Title IX, and meet any of the following criteria, we want you to reach out to us:
Females involved in high school or collegiate sports who have been required to compete with or against a male;
Any student who has been forced to share a bathroom or locker room with a student of the opposite sex at a public or federally-funded school;
Any student who has sincerely-held beliefs that prevent him/her from announcing their “chosen” or “preferred” pronouns;
Any student who has been accused of misgendering or “dead-naming” another student at a public or federally-funded school;
If you or your child(ren) meet any of the above criteria, please email our Director of Legal Advocacy, Leigh Ann O’Neill, at leigh-ann.oneill@fairforall.org.
Your engagement is vital as we address these critical changes and continue our advocacy for lawful educational practices.
https://news.fairforall.org/p/fair-news-title-ixs-shift-and-what?r=7ogxh&triedRedirect=true
Linzi Smith
Well, wonders will never cease, here’s something from the BBC about Linzi’s case.
I previously reported on Linzi’s case here:
https://dustymasterson.substack.com/p/la-marseillaise?utm_source=publication-search
Banned football fan raises £15,000 to sue
Jonny Manning
BBC News, North East and Cumbria
26 April 2024
A football fan banned by her club from its grounds has raised more than £15,000 to take legal action.
Newcastle United (NUFC) supporter Linzi Smith was investigated by the Premier League after the club received a complaint about comments she made on social media.
A lawyer assisting Ms Smith claims the club's actions were a "huge overreach" in to matters unrelated to football.
Both NUFC and the Premier League declined to comment.
The 34-year-old's posts on X (formerly known as Twitter) expressed critical opinions about transgender people.
She said she did not know who had complained about her and the situation had left her feeling "claustrophobic".
The Premier League had collected images from her social media showing where she walked her dog, she added.
"They took a street image of the very park that I walked him around," she said.
"They have basically used the ultimate spying power of the Premier League to delve so far into my life."
Linzi Smith says her tweets were nothing to do with the club
NUFC said it had received a complaint about the posts and referred it to the Premier League.
The club said its privacy policy explained it would share fans’ details with the organisation if they carried out what it called "prohibited activity", including discriminatory conduct.
The Premier League said it had looked at Ms Smith's online activity after being told a supporter had complained, and sent copies of what it found to NUFC, but had no involvement in deciding on a ban.
The club said it had imposed the ban based on the Premier League's published guidance, which recommends a three-year exclusion for "prohibited activity" directed at a club, club employee, staff, player, official, or fan.
A lawyer with campaign group The Free Speech Union, Jill Levene, said Ms Smith did not post from the ground and the recipients of her messages were not known football fans.
Ms Smith said she was questioned by the police to establish whether she had committed a hate crime.
Northumbria Police confirmed she was interviewed as a "voluntary attender" but was later told she would face no further action.
'Gender critical views'
Ms Smith plans legal action to seek damages, alleging the club and the Premier League breached data protection laws and the Equality Act in sharing and using her personal details.
Ms Levene said she had been "treated unfavourably because of the gender critical views" she expressed on social media, adding these were "protected philosophical beliefs" in law.
"I think it is just a huge overreach into people's private lives and their rights to enter into exchanges with people about all sorts of subject matters," she said.
"There shouldn't be this scenario where you have a conversation entirely unrelated to something and someone else chooses to make something of it."
She added Newcastle United should have ignored the complaint as "it's not related to football".
Best of luck to Linzi!
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/ceklzk88dv2o
Rosie Duffield
Christopher Hope on GB News ( Rishi Sunak is nicer to me than Sir Keir Starmer, says Labour MP Rosie Duffield, claiming her party has an 'issue with women' 26 April) reports:
Rosie Duffield made the statement on Chopper's Political Podcast
The Labour Party has an “issue with women”, Canterbury MP Rosie Duffield has said, adding that MPs on her side sometimes tried to sabotage her speeches in the House of Commons.
Duffield - a campaign on women's rights - said that Conservative Prime Minister Rishi Sunak was nicer to her than Labour leader Sir Keir Starmer and felt that the party was "gaslighting" her.
The full article is here:
https://www.gbnews.com/politics/rishi-sunak-keir-starmer-rosie-duffield-labour-party
Meanwhile, Labour’s Rachel Reeves does a great job of not answering the question.
Ms Reeves, out on the campaign trail with Sir Keir Starmer on Friday - Ian Forsyth/Getty Images© Provided by The Telegraph
Rachel Reeves has refused to apologise to Rosie Duffield for how she has been treated by the Labour Party over her views on gender.
The shadow chancellor on Friday declined the opportunity to say sorry to the Canterbury MP, who was cleared of transphobia allegations by party bosses in January following a year-long investigation.
Ms Duffield, a prominent feminist campaigner who believes a person’s sex cannot be changed, has regularly complained about her experiences in Labour and last year likened it to being in an abusive relationship.
She has previously been heckled by male colleagues on her benches while speaking about trans issues in the Commons, prompting her to accuse Keir Starmer’s party of having a “woman problem”.
Asked about fresh criticisms made by Ms Duffield, Ms Reeves told GB News: “I’m really proud to be shadow chancellor in the Labour Party and if Labour wins the next election I’ll be the first-ever female chancellor of the Exchequer.”
Pressed on Ms Duffield’s criticism of the party leadership, she replied: “I’ve been with Keir this morning and he’s out on the campaign trail right now.
“Rosie Duffield is an important member of the parliamentary Labour Party, I’ve known her a long time. All of us over the next seven days are going to be hitting the streets and the doorsteps as part of the local elections.”
Asked whether Ms Duffield was owed an apology: “I’m not sure what the allegations are but Rosie is an important member of the parliamentary Labour Party.
“And as a woman in the Labour Party, and along with Angela Rayner in a senior position in the Labour Party, I’m really proud of the role that Labour women are playing in the local election campaign and the general election whenever the Tories have the guts to call it.”
The full article is here:
Adult Human Female
I understand that anti-women activists had tried to smuggle themselves into this event at Derby University but they were weeded out 😊
Zena Hawley in The Derby Telegraph ( Adult Human Female: University praised for showing film that's sparked protests around the UK 26 April) reports:
A film dubbed by its makers as "the UK's first feature-length documentary about the clash between women's rights and gender ideology/trans rights" has been shown in Derby without any protests.
It took three attempts to show Adult Human Female - which has been called "transphobic" by protesters - at the University of Edinburgh last year. Its content draws on the thoughts and perceptions of women’s rights and child protection campaigners.
The full article is here:
https://www.derbytelegraph.co.uk/news/derby-news/adult-human-female-university-praised-9244077
Lesbian Pride March
Sanchez Manning in The Telegraph ( Proposed Pride march could be alternative for ‘fed up’ lesbians this summer 27 April) reports:
Women’s rights campaigners are planning to hold an alternative march for lesbians this summer because they no longer feel represented at London’s official Pride celebrations.
Jenny Watson, the organiser of the event, claimed the capital’s Pride parade has become dominated by the transgender movement and men indulging in sexual fetishes.
She claimed that those in charge of London Pride have made it clear that “gender-critical” women who disagree with the idea of men identifying as female being classed as lesbian are unwelcomed.
Ms Watson, a lesbian herself, also claimed women now feel uncomfortable at Pride marches due to the growing presence of men wearing “hypersexualised” outfits such as bondage gear.
The 32-year-old said: “I’ve been going to London Pride since I was 18 years old and it used to be a family day out, but I wouldn’t bring my children there now it’s become so hypersexualised.
“One of the things that convinced me to stop going is the year before last when one of the floats was basically a bus full of men wearing leather straps with balls in their mouths.
“Women are not happy with these sorts of displays, but they know if they complain they’ll be told they’re being prudes.
“The Pride committee are also of the view that heterosexual men who identify as women can fall under the definition of lesbian and therefore, gender-critical lesbians are not welcomed.”
Ms Watson said a growing number of lesbians had now become so “fed up” with modern-day Pride celebrations that they decided to hold their own alternative event on the same day this year, June 29.
They hope to begin their parade at the statue of Millicent Fawcett, the suffragette leader in London’s Parliament Square.
“We just want our march to be a positive celebration for lesbians,” Ms Watson added. “We don’t want it to be an event like Pride has become full of straight men with sexual fetishes.”
Plans amid rising protests
The plans come amid rising protests among lesbians against trans women, who were born male, claiming to be the same as gay women and demanding access to their spaces.
Ms Watson has made previous attempts to counter this trend with speed dating events and plans to open a lesbian bar that only admits biological women.
She told how her lesbian dating nights often had men who said they were female turning up and on one occasion there was an individual who arrived “sporting a purple latex outfit and an erection”.
Ms Watson said she has been subject to an onslaught of “transphobia” accusations for her female-only stance, but says she is merely trying to protect women’s spaces and rights.
Proposals to hold the lesbian parade have already begun gathering support.
Last night, Professor Kathleen Stock, who resigned from Sussex University after being targeted by trans activists over her gender-critical views, was among the supporters.
Prof Stock, who co-founded The Lesbian Project, an organisation focused on same-sex attracted females, said: “It’s a great idea to do something different.
“It’s been obvious for a long time that official Pride marches are unfriendly places for lesbians who reject trans activist dogma, and some lesbians are also uncomfortable with the constant emphasis on male sexual interests.”
The full article is here:
Lesbian Visibility Week
SNP MP Joanna Cherry did an excellent speech in the Commons this week to mark this event. It’s a great shame that only a few other MPs turned up to listen.
Baroness Fox
Excellent speech by Baroness Fox in the House of Lords trying to (unsuccessfully) get a crime bill amended to make it clear that offenders should be recorded according to their biological sex (FFS):
Endpiece
As regular readers will know I am a rugby fan and it was the last day of the Women’s Six Nations today. My team, Ireland did well to squeeze into third position by beating Scotland but well done to the Red Roses of England for beating France to win the championship. Great second try by France BTW.
Dear readers
Humza Useless is resigning
https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/uknews/humza-yousaf-to-quit-as-scottish-first-minister-triggering-snp-crisis/ar-AA1nQgPs?ocid=msedgntp&pc=U531&cvid=b42769d07d3c4eb4809962c798e4cd10&ei=48
Enjoy!
Dusty
Even though we know the TRAs will trash it, Dr Bell’s article was well written, measured & convincing. I think that the guardian will reverse ferret so slowly that Katherine Viner, the editor, hopes that nobody will notice.
Malcolm Richard Clark had me in stitches, ‘When Nicola Sturgeon brought the greens into a power-sharing agreement in august 2021, many assumed it was some sort of diversity scheme to give people with serious behavioural problems the opportunity to integrate at the workplace.’
I hope that people will respond to FAIR’s request for consultation; the revised Title IX is likely to sweep away the rights of women and girls.
Glad to hear that Linzi Smith has raised some money to sue NUFC; their actions are like a police state.
The Labour Party continues its disgusting treatment of Rosie Duffield; Rachel Reeves’ ambition leads her to ignore the rights of women and girls. Coward.
Well done to Derby University for showing the film ‘Adult Human Female’. No TRA trouble, amazingly.
I think a lesbian-only pride march is a terrific idea; lots of GC hetero women would support that. Joanna Cherry gave a great speech; notice the sea of empty green seats whenever women have something to say? Likewise Baroness Cox, pleading for the sex, not gender, of offenders to be recorded in the crime statistics. Talk about deaf ears.
I saw Funny Girl the year it was released & enjoyed it. Went off Omar Sharif when he said, ‘All women have a rape fantasy’. How the hell would he know?
Many thanks for your work, Dusty. Pitt Parents always RT my post of your work. The EDIJester, too.