Cass Report

[d4m10n]

Why on earth did you snip the question and only answer negatively to one small portion?

Didn't feel like the other 2/3 of the three part question are all that relevant if the answer to the first part is in the negative.

You've put a lot of effort into arguing for what you think conversion therapy means.

I did not at any point argue that there is just one correct meaning for that phrase. I did point out that what it means in recent news headlines is probably not what it means in the Cass Report.

It comes across very strongly as you supporting the view that therapy intended to help a person gain comfort in their existing sexed body is "conversion therapy" in the same way that therapy intended to turn a person away from their innate sexual attraction.

A talk therapist trying to help someone overcome their subjective sense of same-sex attraction is not doing exactly the same thing as a talk therapist trying to help someone overcome their subjective sense of being embodied in the wrong sex, but they are both doing "conversion therapy" in the sense that phrase is used in (currently unconstitutional) Colorado law.

May I assume you would prefer a much narrower meaning for that phrase?

 

[Emily's Cat]

Didn't feel like the other 2/3 of the three part question are all that relevant if the answer to the first part is in the negative.

Question: Do you mean A or do you mean B or do you mean C?
Answer: I don't mean A.

Seems a bit incomplete, don't you think?

I did not at any point argue that there is just one correct meaning for that phrase. I did point out that what it means in recent news headlines is probably not what it means in the Cass Report.

A talk therapist trying to help someone overcome their subjective sense of same-sex attraction is not doing exactly the same thing as a talk therapist trying to help someone overcome their subjective sense of being embodied in the wrong sex, but they are both doing "conversion therapy" in the sense that phrase is used in (unconstitutional) Colorado law.

May I assume you would prefer a much narrower meaning for that phrase?

Alternatively, you could let us all know whether or not you think Colorado's usage of the phrase is reasonable and appropriate or not. As it stands right now, I don't think any of us have a clue what your opinion is. Which makes it very confusing when you go deep on arguments about a specific meaning.

 

[d4m10n]

Alternatively, you could let us all know whether or not you think Colorado's usage of the phrase is reasonable and appropriate or not.

I think it's close enough to the commonly accepted meaning from the relevant wiki, and I'm not going to make a case for a more bespoke definition here.

 

[Emily's Cat]

I think it's close enough to the commonly accepted meaning from the relevant wiki, and I'm not going to make a case for a more bespoke definition here.

Since my question seems to be too opaque for you, let me simplify it:

Do you, personally, think that definition makes sense?

 

[d4m10n]

Do you, personally, think that definition makes sense?

For the sake of clarity, I try to use the most common definitions of words and phrases unless I'm taking the effort to create a stipulative definition^WP for use within a specific argument or discussion. The common meaning of "conversion therapy" to indicate professional efforts to change a patient's subjective desires and self-perceptions around homosexuality, bisexuality, transsexuality, etc. seems serviceable enough to me.

May I assume you would prefer a much narrower meaning for that phrase?

 

[Emily's Cat]

Okay, I'm just going to assume that all that blather means that you, personally, think that counseling to try to bring a child into alignment with their sexed body instead of placing them on a path to permanent medicalization constitutes "conversion therapy".

 

[d4m10n]

May I assume you would prefer a much narrower meaning for that phrase?

 

[Rolfe]

https://twitter.com/x/status/2043682779355857058

 

[Emily's Cat]

May I assume you would prefer a much narrower meaning for that phrase?

I'd prefer you to answer the question I asked: Do you, personally, think that the definition makes sense?

 

[d4m10n]

I'd prefer you to answer the question I asked: Do you, personally, think that the definition makes sense?

I'd prefer a fair exchange of answers, for the sake of ongoing reciprocity. I'll answer your question from #664 if you answer mine from #661.

 

[d4m10n]

Good piece covering recent developments on the topic of youth gender medicine in the UK.

Trials and Tribulations

Activists demand proof while burying the evidence

www.voidifremoved.co.uk

Excerpt follows:

The problem with this is that this is what the data linkage study would have given actual numbers on. The data linkage study which was in part blocked by an organisation Stephen Whittle leads. So one organisation Whittle is director of is involved in preventing new evidence coming to light, while another organisation Whittle is director of smears Cass in public for not having that data.

The exact people publicly attacking Cass for not having evidence of detransition rates are the ones hiding that evidence in the first place.​

One of the fascinating things about this topic to me is that skeptics usually side with the people clamoring for more data and evidence, but in this case most skeptics (even here at ISF) have taken the side of activists who are actively suppressing patient follow-up studies in the UK.

 

[Emily's Cat]

I'd prefer a fair exchange of answers, for the sake of ongoing reciprocity. I'll answer your question from #664 if you answer mine from #661.

Oh for the love of rational discourse!

FFS, here:

May I assume you would prefer a much narrower meaning for that phrase?

I would prefer an ACCURATE meaning for that phrase. I would specifically prefer that there are distinct terms for 1) interventional and harmful practices that seek to make a child pretend to be opposite-sex attracted and 2) preventing interventional and harmful practices that seek to make a child pretend to be the opposite sex.

 

[d4m10n]

Since no one in the field of youth gender medicine has ever claimed to help children "pretend to be the opposite sex," I have to wonder whether accuracy is really your goal here.

I don't disagree with your main point, though, which is that we ought to try to disambiguate conversion therapy_orientation from conversion therapy_identity in order to make it clear that these are two different processes being lumped together for the sake of (political and/or conversational) convenience.

 

[Emily's Cat]

Since no one in the field of youth gender medicine has ever claimed to help children "pretend to be the opposite sex," I have to wonder whether accuracy is really your goal here.

You're playing word games again, and I'm just tired of it. They're not effective and they're exhausting. It's absolutely PRETENDING to be the opposite sex, because it is not possible to actually change their sex. The absolute best that can ever be accomplished is plausible mimcry while still being the exact same sex they were in the ◊◊◊◊◊◊◊ womb.

I don't disagree with your main point, though, which is that we ought to try to disambiguate conversion therapy_orientation from conversion therapy_identity in order to make it clear that these are two different processes being lumped together for the sake of (political and/or conversational) convenience.

Am I supposed to infer an answer to my question from this? Can you just answer the actual question clearly and directly, without the tap dancing around?

 

[d4m10n]

Do you, personally, think that definition makes sense?

I'd say it makes enough sense to be usable if you're talking to someone who wants to affirm children in both their stated sexual orientation and their stated gender identity, which is to say just about anyone in my progressive social circles. Otherwise, we need to disambiguate the two processes for the sake of asking whether they are supported by evidence.

 

[Rolfe]

Says it all.

https://twitter.com/x/status/2048040786311160222

 

[Matthew Best]

British Medical Association drops its opposition to the Cass Review.

Verifying Device

The BMA voted in 2024 to oppose the implementation of the Cass Review, saying that its recommendations were “unsubstantiated”, and said they would conduct their own review. They have now done so and found that Baroness Cass "has been vindicated in the way she approached the data”. Professor David Strain, the chair of the BMA board and lead author of the report, was asked to name a single one of Baroness Cass's 32 recommendations the BMA opposed, and replied "I can't".

Nevertheless, the BMA still wants doctors to be able to prescribe puberty blockers, because of the "autonomy of a doctor".

 

[d4m10n]

A pair of articles from Benjamin Ryan, a writer on gender medicine whom I trust much more than the NY Sun generally.

Transgender Activists Sink Medical-Education Course Skeptical of Gender Transitions for Minors | The New York Sun

The campaign to void the course is part of an effort to discredit a major youth-gender-medicine critic.

www.nysun.com

How Trans Activist Erin Reed Won a Battle Against Youth Gender Medicine Skeptics

I obtained a trove of internal communications documenting how Ms. Reed's advocacy led the body that oversees continuing medical education for doctors to void a course that cast doubt on this field.

benryan.substack.com

 

[Matthew Best]

A thread by Hannah Barnes on the history of the BMA's interaction with the Cass Review:

https://twitter.com/x/status/2052140358134272227

 

[Aber]

British Medical Association drops its opposition to the Cass Review.

Verifying Device

The BMA voted in 2024 to oppose the implementation of the Cass Review, saying that its recommendations were “unsubstantiated”, and said they would conduct their own review. They have now done so and found that Baroness Cass "has been vindicated in the way she approached the data”. Professor David Strain, the chair of the BMA board and lead author of the report, was asked to name a single one of Baroness Cass's 32 recommendations the BMA opposed, and replied "I can't".

Nevertheless, the BMA still wants doctors to be able to prescribe puberty blockers, because of the "autonomy of a doctor".

For those without access

The BMA’s 36-page report said there was “substantive disagreement” among the group conducting the review regarding the topic of puberty blockers.

It outlined two separate “perspectives” on puberty blockers among members, but did not come down in favour of either view.

The report said View A supports restrictions on puberty blockers due to their “known and plausible harms”. View B supports keeping puberty blockers available on the NHS and says “the Cass review may over-emphasis potential harms and under-represent reported benefits”.

Of the 12 members of the group, four were View A, six were View B and two were neutral.