DrewMerson wrote:

That sounds more like you can’t explain.

tin_robot wrote:

Knight wrote:

People who opppsed this https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/tavistock-scandal-gender-clinic-puberty-blockers-nhs-investigation-ghrqxk8pn … are brave and admirable actually and I think it’s wrong that we’re using Rowling as an example. And if you’re thinking, ‘it’s in the Times’… yeah probably because none of the left wing papers will cover this sort of thing. Multiple female journalists at the guardian have been effectively hounded out for daring to speak up about this.

OK, let's talk about the Tavistock.

I'll spoiler, because this will be long...

Spoiler:

I can't read the Times article because it's behind a paywall, but I'm guessing it's similar to the many, many other newspaper articles about the Tavistock and the GIDS service. Yes, including in left wing papers.
I suppose the first thing to say is that the fate of the Tavistock has very little to do with Rowling's position, although she certainly tweets about it a fair bit. Ultimately it's the story of a failing hospital - albeit a very specific one - rather than about whether biological sex and gender are indistinguishable.  To conclude that the failings of the Tavistock somehow demonstrate that we don't need a service for trans people, is rather like concluding that the Alder Hey scandal proves we shouldn't have paediatricians.
The Tavistock is closing, but the intention is - at least in theory - that gender clinics continue, albeit in more localised hubs, and with a slightly different approach. The plan is to have 8 centres across the UK.  I'll come back to why I've written "in theory" a bit later.
So, what's the issue with the Tavistock?  For the uninitiated it's a clinic for people with Gender Identity Disorder, which has existed for the last 33 years, and is now closing following an interim report on the independent review by Dr Hilary Cass.  (Itself a result of whistle blowing, and concerns from the Care Quality Commission.) Some of the issues she raised included the centre's inability to cope with the massive demands placed upon it, and the way in which treatment approaches have rapidly changed without going through the usual reviews and governance processes. She echoes concerns that many medical professionals have expressed for a long time about the intersection of gender dysphoria, neurodiversity and psychosocial needs - and whether enough is done to explore the latter before addressing the former.
Based on Cass's findings, and the reports and whistle blowing that led to it, the decision to review what services exist for Trans people is both welcome and long overdue. It's also clear that the processes in the Tavistock itself were not adequately regulated - a situation made worse by the absence of any other institution to set it against.
However.  It's also a big problem.  We're a long way from having the afore mentioned 8 Gender Identity hubs, and the Tavistock closes in the Spring. We already know what will fill the vacuum because the difficulty accessing the Tavistock in the first place means that alternatives already exist. And ion the Tavistock was less than ideal, the rest is pretty much the Wild West.
Here's some context.  According to the data out there, less than 20% of people that went to the Tavistock got referred for any kind of hormone treatment or similar (despite press reports to the contrary).  People that were referred invariably went through a number of sessions assessing their need, their mental state, and offering other forms of support.
At least, that's my understanding.  None of my trans patients have ever actually made it to the GIDS service.  The wait was simply too long. So they've found other solutions. A popular option is something called "Gender GP". It's run by a couple off doctors who are based in Spain, because they can't legally practice in the UK. They get plenty of patients though, because people are desperate.  Rightly or wrongly this service seems much happier to start patients on medication which they pay for until they run out of money. At which point they come to their GPs asking us to continue it, creating one hell of a moral dilemma. (Do we continue despite it not really being our specialty, and knowing they may not have been properly assessed, or do we stop causing massive emotional distress, and unwanted physical changes.)  If seen through GIDS these people would have counselling, they would look at other options, they would have support in freezing their sperm or their eggs if they want to have children in the future etc etc.  Instead, they're getting quick fixes privately, and then being left in a mess. The absence of any real political desire to ensure we have really good services for trans people means that the support network that's so desperately needed to prevent all this looks likely to become yet more diminished when the Tavistock goes. It was shit, but it was almost certainly better than nothing.
All of which means that the cheering that has greeted the closure of the Tavistock feels at best misplaced.  Perhaps I'll change my mind if, and when, we actually have a meaningful service in its place. (It's worth saying as well that Cass's final report is yet to come out, and we don't know if more damning stuff is to come out, or alternatively whether it will be watered down from the interim report. I guess it's also worth saying that a number of trans people are unconvinced by Cass's "independence", which I think is almost certainly unfair, though her reference to a lack of consensus about treatment - whilst true in the UK - ignores a fair amount of consensus internationally, and the review does seem to be oddly inward looking - arguably the same problem that we had with the Tavistock itself.) 
Are the "people who opposed it" brave?  It depends on which people you mean. The initial whistle blowers absolutely are.  All health systems rely on people being prepared to shout when things aren't right, and clearly they weren't at the Tavistock. The very existence of the Cass investigation implies that the system, whilst slow, is responding. However it's been slow at least in part because live was made very unpleasant indeed for some of those early whistle blowers who were vilified precisely because the debate about trans people is so extreme. So, yes, they're brave and should be commended for taking a stance.
Those who have taken the issues at the Tavistock and used them as a stick to beat the trans community with though?  No, they're not brave. As I say, a failing hospital doesn't negate the reality of the experience of trans people. It's incredibly distressing, and frustrating, to see the one thing being equated with the other. The Cass report was frequently cited by Conservatives as a reason not to oppose "Conversion therapy" for trans people for instance. Meanwhile, as mentioned, I've not seen much evidence of these new "hubs", we don't yet have the final Cass report to say what, if anything they will offer, and there's growing concern that the answer will be "not a lot".  If so, that will be actively harmful to a large number of trans people in the UK. (As talked about before, whilst there remains a great deal of debate about the exact nature of gender dysphoria, there's a very clear view that acceptance is incredibly important if you're hoping to reduce the risk of depression and suicide.)

DrewMerson wrote:

I know, Andy. Things are much different in Holland though, as you can well imagine.

I’m sorry, you’ve lost me.

DrewMerson wrote:

Then stop calling it ‘cancel culture’, Dave. Nobody is cancelled, it’s not a culture. By your own admission. Calling it ‘cancel culture’ helps perpetuate the myth that people are ever ‘cancelled’, and there are people out there who actually believe it is a thing in the face of all of the evidence to the contrary.

Vela wrote:

I'm sitting here with my laptop and my smartphone. I have an order with ebay for a battery for my Volvo key fob. All very convenient. I have no clue where that stuff comes from. That's the fact of the situation.  A bit tougher to address than a multi-millionaire's opinion on what constitutes a woman.

Isn't there a supply chain certification program? I'm not denying the image, I'm saying there is at least some existing audit process already. Imperfect, sure. But it is not isolated to lithium. Any and all mining minerals will be in some places, dug up by children. That's what I meant.

Roujin wrote:

Can't believe i get to read through 20 pages across two threads and absorb all the takes in one, gluttonous sitting.

Fucking great stuff.

I hope you've all been good little progressives, etc.