Susie Green & Mermaids UK - "Trans Kid Support Charity", Susie had her underage kid get GRS

Mermaids seem to be making some small concessions towards medical accuracy. Some eagle-eyed terves spotted that they've changed their guidance on puberty blockers to say they "are believed to be reversible", from just outright claiming they are reversible. It's weasel words but shows they're trying to cover their arses in case of any legal trouble.
That is because the NHS has completely changed a lot of their information. There is no way that Mermaids can be seen as going against the NHS, when they need their support to keep going.

Transgendertrend go into it more, showing before and after changes and have the link to the archived pages.
Transgendertrend article
 
Última edición:
Great news!

Mermaids and Stonewall aren't allowed to intervene in the Keira Bell lawsuit!
2020-09-08 06.47.26.png
2020-09-08 06.48.02.png


Eat shit Susie Green!
 
What's TransgenderTrend and why is their win here better overall than Mermaid's?


Who are we?
We are a group of parents, academics and childcare professionals with no political or religious affiliation, from a range of backgrounds. We are united in our concern about the medical transition of children and young people and the erasure of girls’ sex-based protections in schools and society.

What are we for?
We believe in the right of every child to live free from discrimination and harassment. We defend the right of children to be gender non-conforming and to express themselves however they wish without being given labels or encouraged to believe that they may have been ‘born in the wrong body.’ We defend the right of children to be treated as children and not have adult ideology imposed on them as ‘fact.’ We believe that gender variant children have the right to grow up and reach maturity without unnecessary medical intervention. We defend the right of all children to feel safe and to be free from bullying and, particularly in the case of girls, the right to boundaries with the opposite sex.

Our campaign aims to:
1. Encourage the widest possible public debate and engagement on the ethical issues of medical transition of children and the teaching of unscientific ‘innate gender identity’ ideology to children.

2. Empower parents to challenge the new gender orthodoxy in their children’s schools and support teachers and professionals to safeguard the rights and protections of all children, without exception.
 

If this is true, does that mean Susie had her son's bollocks chopped off and cock flayed, left him sterile and ruined his body, leaving him with a stink ditch cobbled together with the remains of his pathetic dick and his bowels, for nothing?



If toy preference has fuck all to do with gender, then she 1. Handled the whole situation completely abhorrently, putting her selfish desire for a girl and to be that spechul munchie by proxie parent, o brave, many sad, such warrior above and beyond her son's well being, traumatising him over his choice of toys and just in general ruining his fucking life and 2. She mutilated his body for life irreparably, left him permanently infertile before he was even 18.

Her Son was not even able to vote, get married, drive, smoke or drink alcohol and Susie Green abused him in the worst possible way because he played with the wrong toys.

It completely and utterly sickens me, more so that the Labour Party swallow down Mermaids cock still (only not Susie's Sons cos that's medical waste already) and if we dare criticise or speak up or not agree, then *we're* the megacunts extraordinnaire. Last time I checked, I never had a child butchered because it played with "the wrong" toys.
 
If this is true, does that mean Susie had her son's bollocks chopped off and cock flayed, left him sterile and ruined his body, leaving him with a stink ditch cobbled together with the remains of his pathetic dick and his bowels, for nothing?



If toy preference has fuck all to do with gender, then she 1. Handled the whole situation completely abhorrently, putting her selfish desire for a girl and to be that spechul munchie by proxie parent, o brave, many sad, such warrior above and beyond her son's well being, traumatising him over his choice of toys and just in general ruining his fucking life and 2. She mutilated his body for life irreparably, left him permanently infertile before he was even 18.

Her Son was not even able to vote, get married, drive, smoke or drink alcohol and Susie Green abused him in the worst possible way because he played with the wrong toys.

It completely and utterly sickens me, more so that the Labour Party swallow down Mermaids cock still (only not Susie's Sons cos that's medical waste already) and if we dare criticise or speak up or not agree, then *we're* the megacunts extraordinnaire. Last time I checked, I never had a child butchered because it played with "the wrong" toys.
I think in Susie's case, partly it was "the wrong" toys, partly it was her ex-husband's/Jack's dad's fear that he was going to grow up to be a gay man. Posie Parker/Kellie-Jay Keen keeps correcting her "better a happy daughter than a dead son" to "better a straight daughter than a gay son". Graham Linehan, while a bit of a cow himself sometimes, is very good on this topic, and points out the homophobia of a lot of what she says in her TED talk:

It’s interesting isn’t it that the two photos seen early on, the before and after, one photo of Jack as a baby and one of him as a woman are presented in the following way.

“Jackie hates this photo because she looks like one of the Village People, and she loves this one, because she looks hot.”

Let’s overlook the strangeness of a woman proudly presenting her ‘daughter’ as a sexual object to an audience of nerds, and linger instead on why the ‘Village People’—as the undesirable ‘before’ part of the picture—is so accidentally apt. I don't think the father is a fan, is what I'm saying.
 
I think in Susie's case, partly it was "the wrong" toys, partly it was her ex-husband's/Jack's dad's fear that he was going to grow up to be a gay man. Posie Parker/Kellie-Jay Keen keeps correcting her "better a happy daughter than a dead son" to "better a straight daughter than a gay son". Graham Linehan, while a bit of a cow himself sometimes, is very good on this topic, and points out the homophobia of a lot of what she says in her TED talk:


You're totally right with Linehan, but I do love the fact he makes so many idiots so very, very angry. It's also interesting seeing so many of them purge/memory hole the fact they liked Father Ted and Linehan's other shows because he dares to call out the inherent homophobia that, as you rightly point out, exists behind far, far too many of these cases of parents trooning out their children.
 
Do we even know if the poor kid had the “right toys” to play with at his house? Or was the game rigged from the start?

He did but he had a preference for “girly” things. If you watch Green’s TED talk she explains that she and her husband took all of his Barbies and Polly Pocket toys away and it was at this point their son started saying he must really be a girl and “God made a mistake”.
 
He did but he had a preference for “girly” things. If you watch Green’s TED talk she explains that she and her husband took all of his Barbies and Polly Pocket toys away and it was at this point their son started saying he must really be a girl and “God made a mistake”.
Of course they didn't consider the possibility their son is just saying that to get his toys back. Children never lie after all, even when they think they could benefit from it.
 
I can’t wait for Keira Bell’s two court cases to begin. She is a one-woman wrecking ball. Mermaids will hopefully go down in the fall of child abusing dominos.

less than a month til the Judicial Review into puberty blockers begins (spoiler, NOT a harmless pause button. Obviously)!
 
What impact, if any, do you think this ruling will potentially have on other Anglosphere countries?

It definitely isn’t a good look, and it gives people who are against transitioning children a solid bit of publicly available evidence to point to.
However, in countries where the healthcare system is private I think it’ll be a lot harder to slow down the juggernaut as there’s a fuck tonne of money involved. With the UK we can at least stop making blockers available on the NHS and amend the guidance on their off label use to stop them being prescribed to kids.
 
I'm not a praying person, but were the Big Man and I on good terms, I would be kneebound hoping it would set an example to other plaves.
one of the things i love about the farms is that so many of the farmers are really articulate and very good writers. That's a beautifully-designed sentence. And I'm constantly astounded by how witty so many of the titles and subtitles are.
 
It definitely isn’t a good look, and it gives people who are against transitioning children a solid bit of publicly available evidence to point to.
However, in countries where the healthcare system is private I think it’ll be a lot harder to slow down the juggernaut as there’s a fuck tonne of money involved. With the UK we can at least stop making blockers available on the NHS and amend the guidance on their off label use to stop them being prescribed to kids.

I agree that it will be harder to stop the juggernaut in situations where the tab isn’t being picked up by the tax payer, however (and I’m not in the US so this is second hand observation) medical insurance companies will likely exploit any plausible excuse not to pay up, and the drugs used as puberty blockers, the GnRH analogueclass of drugs (Leuprolide, Triptolerin, Goserelin etc) are really fucking expensive.

FWIW, I don’t think the court will completely rule out the use of these drugs for gender dysphoric adolescents, more likely they will be restricted, hopefully to the point where prescribing them becomes almost unworkable.
Healthcare in the UK is devolved to the 4 nations (England, Scotland, Wales and NI) and our legal system also varies, with some laws applying everywhere and others being specific to the region, so perhaps this judicial review will initially only apply to England &Wales? I need to look into that, nonetheless, what I suspect will happen is the final decision on prescribing will be taken out of the hands of the GIDS clinical team and given to either a specially convened panel of non-GIDS doctors and specialist social workers*, or decided in a court on a case by case basis. There is already precedent for courts to intervene in situations where a patient is too young to consent and a proposed treatment course is controversial/untested/there is disagreement between parents and doctors. If they go that route and GIDS are forced to go cap in hand to the judiciary every time they want to make a baby lesbian into a straight man it will end up being effectively banned without actually being outright banned.

Law isn’t my thing, but I believe decisions like this are made in the Family Court division of the High Court, under what is known as ‘Inherent Jurisdiction’.

Internationally, a U.K. court ruling on the capacity of children to consent to medical intervention for gender dysphoria will be a slow-bleed-out gut shot to the belly of WPATH undermining it’s credibility. It will also scare the shit out of gender medicine doctors worldwide, who are always a couple of crazy ex patients away from having their licensed revoked. There is a culture of gender doctors reporting each other to get rivals struck off, so anyone that values their livelihood/comfortable lifestyle will be forced to think twice before intervening in paediatric cases. U.K. parents who take their children abroad for these purposes will be risking child protection intervention, especially if a court has already refused NHS treatment on a specific case-by-case basis.

edited to add source for cost of Triptolerin, the NHS pays around a grand a year just for the drug cost, add in quarterly appointments for injection administration, and the bone density scans necessary to make sure transkid’s bones don‘t crumble to dust and it’s looking less and less like a ’simple pause button’.



*Also, GIDS own top social worker is suing them: https://www.crowdjustice.com/case/gids-concerns/

Sadly, the social worker job ad for the Leeds GIDS outreach is already closed to further applicants, sorry I didn’t post earlier, kiwis!


Here is the GMC’s general guidance on consent: https://www.gmc-uk.org/ethical-guidance/ethical-guidance-for-doctors/0-18-years/making-decisions

This bit seems particularly relevant,


26
It is important that you assess maturity and understanding on an individual basis and with regard to the complexity and importance of the decision to be made. You should remember that a young person who has the capacity to consent to straightforward, relatively risk-free treatment may not necessarily have the capacity to consent to complex treatment involving high risks or serious consequences.
The capacity to consent can also be affected by their physical and emotional development and by changes in their health and treatment.

This is where the legal argument will be made, I suspect. The current ‘Gillick Competency’ rules came out of a legal case relating to contraceptives - having the capacity to decide to take the pill as a teenager (and make yourself purposefully temporarily infertile) is very different to beginning a pathway that means you never produce mature gametes at all.
 
Última edición:
one of the things i love about the farms is that so many of the farmers are really articulate and very good writers. That's a beautifully-designed sentence. And I'm constantly astounded by how witty so many of the titles and subtitles are.
Aw,thanks fren.i was very sleep deprived but just saying what I thought. I hope this insanity passes
 
Susie got a response from the UK government:
1599746854427.png
https://twitter.com/Mermaids_Gender/status/1304039782457249792 (Archive)
Child Abuser dijo:
Latest News: Gender Recognition Act Reform
We have received a letter from the Government Equalities Office and would like to thank the Minister for Women and Equalities, Rt Hon Liz Truss for her communication. You can read the Minister’s letter and our original letter below.

The past few months have been fraught with hazardous speculation around the impact of potential GRA reforms, and we have raised our service users’ concerns with parliamentarians, allies and the wider public in the hope that any changes brought forward are to the benefit of trans lives. We refrain from pre-empting the Government’s response to the GRA consultation, though we are hopeful that the Prime Minister will remain true to his past commitments to LGBTQ+ acceptance and equality.

Unfortunately, GRA reform was never intended to address challenges faced by under 18s. Still, we remained hopeful that young people’s rights would be addressed. The Minister’s latest letter, sent to our policy team last week, puts it beyond doubt that GRA reform will not affect under 18s, either positively or negatively. Given the Minister’s statement in April , we ought not to be surprised, though the letter marks the first time we have seen official confirmation of the fact.

In that statement, the Minister said: ‘Finally, which is not a direct issue concerning the Gender Recognition Act, but is relevant, making sure that the under 18s are protected from decisions that they could make, that are irreversible in the future. I believe strongly that adults should have the freedom to lead their lives as they see fit, but I think it’s very important that while people are still developing their decision-making capabilities that we protect them from making those irreversible decisions.’

To be clear, someone does not need a gender recognition certificate to access healthcare support and we would repeat our request to meet with the Minister so we can discuss the distinction between the two. Young people rightly already have access to healthcare support without currently having access to the gender recognition process. With regards future GRA reform, we are pleased to see the Minister’s commitment to the continuation of this and future work in making it a timely service, stating, ‘ Everyone, including transgender people, must receive the healthcare and support they need. I am also committed to ensuring children and young people are able to access appropriate and timely psychological and medical support.’

While we are relieved to hear now that the GEO has no plans to introduce new barriers of access to trans young people, we had hoped for some positive change. We again call for under 18s to be given the opportunity to update their birth certificates in line with other forms of identification such as passports. The GEO letter would imply that the Minister has made up her mind on the matter, stating: ‘there are no plans for this to change’.

We regret that the conversation around trans children and young people is increasingly beset by polarised debate and harmful misinformation. We reaffirm our offer to help Rt Hon Liz Truss meet with our families to help address some of her concerns away from the clamour of public argument.

As we await substantive news on GRA reform, we call for a new, more accessible gender recognition system which does not pathologise trans people, a de-medicalised system which includes non-binary people, and the removal of the spousal veto which allows husbands, wives and partners to govern another individual’s rights.
We call for a system, which allows people to be recognised for who they are without being subjected to an oppressive form of gender-policing which continues to impact so many lives, transgender, non-binary and cisgender.

Everyone, including transgender and non-binary people, must receive the healthcare and support they need without discrimination. As this latest chapter in the ongoing campaign for trans rights draws to a conclusion, we renew our call for Government and society to hear the voices of young trans and non-binary people.
Lui Asquith, Head of Legal and Policy.

Transcription below for accessibility.

COGEO-002777-Susie-Green-Mermaids-UPDATED-675x1024.png

Dear Susie,
Thank you for your letter of 10 July about medical care for transgender young people.

I am committed to supporting LGBT people and improving the lives of all citizens. I was clear in the most recent Women & Equalities Questions that we will not be rolling back the rights of transgender people in the UK.

Everyone, including transgender people, must receive the healthcare and support they need. I am also committed to ensuring children and young people are able to access appropriate and timely psychological and medical support.

I do believe that under 18s must be protected from taking decisions which could have an irreversible impact on their development. As you will know, the Gender Recognition Act does not currently enable those under 18 to apply for a Gender Recognition Certificate and there are no plans for this to change.

Thank you for your invitation to meet. As I am sure you can appreciate, the pressures on Ministerial time are heightened at the moment, however my officials would be pleased to meet with you in my stead.

Thank you for your letter.
Best wishes,
[Signature]
THE RT HON ELIZABETH TRUSS MP
Minister for Women and Equalities
OurLetter1-888x1024.png

OurLetter2-1024x745.png

Dear Minister,
Further to your colleague’s letter of 22 May 2020, we write to offer you as Minister for Women and Equalities, and Kemi Badenoch MP as Minister for Equalities, the opportunity to meet and listen to transgender and gender-diverse young people themselves, and to hear some of the issues they face and discuss ways in which the Government could help support and improve the lives young people who are transgender and gender-diverse, and their families.

Mermaids currently has just under 1000 members under the age of 20. Many of these young people we represent have, especially in the last month, reached out to us after experiencing deep hurt and pain due to the discourse (particularly on social media) around transgender healthcare and access to such healthcare by young people.

The uncertainty around young transgender and gender-diverse youth to gender-affirmative care, which has arisen in the past few months, has meant that many of the young people we support on a daily basis have been left extremely anxious and frightened about what will happen going forward. We are led to believe that you will in due course clarify your comment ‘that the under 18s are protected from decisions that they could make, that are irreversible in future’. Before you do so, we think it crucial that you speak with the young people that will be impacted by any decision you make.

We concur with your approach to the complex and nuanced issue of medical care for transgender and gender-diverse youth, to be ‘led by the facts in this area’, as you previously stated in your response letter to us. We believe that by speaking directly to the young people whose wellbeing you have referred to as your ‘absolute priority’, you will be able to truly determine how best to ensure transgender and gender-diverse young people—an already very vulnerable demographic in society—are protected from further inequality.

We feel it important to inform that as a result of recent media discourse, we have received the devastating news that a young transgender person has taken their own life this past week, and another transgender young person is in hospital recovering after attempting to take their own life. We feel it necessary to mention these heart-breaking incidents to press upon you the importance of talking to these young people. Not only have questions around medical care for transgender youth been a point of anxiety, but as I’m sure you are aware, instances of transphobic comments and opinions on social media platforms have escalated greatly following certain comments by high-profile figures against the trans and gender-diverse community. As social media is a huge presence in many young people’s lives, the impact on them has been considerable.

We urge you to take us up on our offer. As a charity organisation that is directly involved in supporting transgender and gender-diverse young people under the age of 19, we have connections all over the country with young people who have been the most deeply impacted by recent events. Their voices are important and we want to ensure they are heard in any decisions that affect them. We look forward to receiving your availability in due course. Our Lui Asquith, Legal and Policy Manager, is the best person to contact in order to organise diaries on [CONTACT].
Yours sincerely,
Susie Green
CEO, Mermaids
https://mermaidsuk.org.uk/news/latest-news-gra/ (Archive)

TL;DR-

The Good News: UK government aren't going to make it easier for lunatics like Susie to troon out their kids

The Bad News: They aren't going to make it harder.
 
Atrás
Top Abajo