Vague UKpol today: The UK's courts are shit and have never done anything for trans people, which is why we *really* need to fight to stay under the ECHR


ukpol trans (bad) 

The high court has just outlawed puberty blockers for trans people undergoing puberty.

Presumably children with "precocious puberty" will still be allowed to access them - at least I hope so.

This has happened because terfs were able to groom a vulnerable de-transitioner and alarm her with medically unfounded fears about fertility.

The way forward passes through the ECHR, but also something needs to be done about terfs.

Also, people who de-transition need more and better support. Some of them are traumatised and vulnerable. I think it's on us to make sure that people have room to experiment and play with gender, but also to have support and safe landings if they decide they're cis after all. What this means in practice is not totally clear to me, but they need to at least be welcome in queer spaces. This is a tiny number of people, but they do need support and respect and, alas, if they get groomed by terfs, they can be weaponised in away that almost certainly doesn't benefit them, but undoubtedly makes things worse for trans people.

It is deeply frustrating that many trans kids will be subject to a known hazard so that a smaller number of people can avoid an imaginary hazard of something that's been demonstrated to be safe.

I don't know law, but it sounds like if the court thinks kids can't consent to stop a traumatising puberty, that means that importing blockers for them is also illegal,

ukpol trans (bad) 

Here is a Guardian article about the bad court ruling. (The article itself is alright and frankly all UK media is bad, so this is as good a link as any)

Show thread

ukpol trans (bad) 

Here is the pink news article on it which is better, but ~massive~ trigger warning on the content.

Show thread

ukpol trans (bad) extremely awful judge opinions, don't open if you're not able to cope with hideous awfulness right now 

The judges ruled that because ~most~ kids on puberty blockers go on to do HRT, then they can't consent to puberty blockers because they can't consent to HRT.

The logic of this is . . . special.

The Pink News article goes on:

'She added that children would need to understand the impact of the “treatment pathway” on “future and life-long relationships”, and be aware of the “unknown physical consequences of taking puberty blocking drugs and the fact that the evidence base for this treatment is as yet highly uncertain”.'

The Dutch have done a huge study of puberty blockers. They're safe.

But the 'future life long relationships' bit is actually saying we're unlovable and unfuckable, because that's the only reading that makes sense in context.

I want to have a fucking riot over this. Where's the protest?

Show thread

ukpol trans (bad) 

The court refused to allow either Mermaids or an actual trans youth to participate.

Tavistock will appear to the Supreme Court. In the meantime, nobody gets blockers.

I still don't know about any protests planned.

Show thread

My sources say the UK Supreme Court is full of British judges, which I would generally take as a bad sign.

Show thread

ukpol trans (bad) extremely awful judge opinions, don't open if you're not able to cope with hideous awfulness right now 

@celesteh That's fucking terrible. I'm so sorry. 😟

ukpol trans (bad) 

@celesteh fucking hell

Bigots love to deny people the right to consent and therefore treat them non-consensually and claim it's protection

No it's abuse

Sign in to participate in the conversation

We are a Mastodon instance for LGBT+ and allies!