The thousand year old castle of Kremenets Podolskiy, perched on a rocky outcrop almost completely surrounded by a deep ravine
It is so impregnable, according to legend/history it was the only citadel to ever resist the Mongol hordes. I have my doubts about this but still. Wow
That’s straight into my top ten castles
Other contenders
Krak Des Chevaliers Caerphilly? Chenonceau Where else?
Corfe Portchester
Both of these are majorly influenced by their setting.
Setting is really key for castles. My favourites are generally the ruined ones. Manorbier is one example whose setting makes the difference. Skenfrith another. Berze le Chatel isn't ruined but is a lovely stony hulk of a building in a very pretty vineyard setting.
Ha! I know Skenfrith. It is a lyrical ruin
We have to have one from Scotland. Edinburgh maybe. Or Dunvegan on Skye
For the sheer majesty of its setting I would propose Dunottar just south of Stonehaven.
Never heard of it. Just googled. Impressive!
Yes indeed. In some ways it reminds me of Dunluce Castle
The thousand year old castle of Kremenets Podolskiy, perched on a rocky outcrop almost completely surrounded by a deep ravine
It is so impregnable, according to legend/history it was the only citadel to ever resist the Mongol hordes. I have my doubts about this but still. Wow
That’s straight into my top ten castles
Other contenders
Krak Des Chevaliers Caerphilly? Chenonceau Where else?
Corfe Portchester
Both of these are majorly influenced by their setting.
Setting is really key for castles. My favourites are generally the ruined ones. Manorbier is one example whose setting makes the difference. Skenfrith another. Berze le Chatel isn't ruined but is a lovely stony hulk of a building in a very pretty vineyard setting.
Ha! I know Skenfrith. It is a lyrical ruin
We have to have one from Scotland. Edinburgh maybe. Or Dunvegan on Skye
For the sheer majesty of its setting I would propose Dunottar just south of Stonehaven.
Scotland is the country for castles. Stirling, Tantallon, Kilchurn, Duart, Caerlaverock and many more.
On topic, Boycott Costa. They've picked a side and need to be punished for it.
That's the only way Woke Capitalism and these Culture Wars end.
I won't be buying anything there for the foreseeable.
CR: Oh no, not the trans topic again *eye roll emoji*
Also CR: Boycott Costa for showing a trans person in an advert.
What is "Woke Capitalism"? What are the "Culture Wars"? Do you also believe in "Cultural Marxism" or the like?
Can Capitalism really ever truly be woke? Back in the early 00s Disney was very squeamish about 'gay stuff', seemed to recoil away from anything that might hint at the whiff of same-sex relationships. Because they calculated they would turn more people off, which would hit their bottom line.
Now things have changed, and there is more to gain by embracing LGB than being silent. The T is just a bit behind that. If companies are right, then by embracing Trans issues, they'll make some more money than they otherwise might have. If they're wrong, they'll lose money and their businesses can be replaced by their competitors.
Companies aren't being "woke" (not that I know what some people mean by that) - they either market things they think will appeal to people with dispensable income, or they do things to cover their arses from lawsuits. They don't care about inclusion or diversity or whatever; they care about profit.
Yes, one can save a lot of time by recognising that (obviously there will be exceptions, as for every generalisation) If one doesn't like a system, work to change it, don't mess about targeting individual companies operating within it. There are three ways to effect change in a democratic market economy:
1. Pass a law making it mandatory 2. Change regulations to make it profitable for companies to do what you want 3. Encourage consumer behaviour to achieve the same effect.
In my less contentious sphere, we try to persuade Government (1) to mandate an end to live exports, (2) to provide subsidies to farmers transitioning from factory farming to less unpleasant systems and (3) introduce labelling of higher-welfare meat so consumers can vote with their wallets (as they did for eggs) and farmers can increase sales by responding to (2). What we don't do, by and large, is appeal to companies' better natures or condemn anyone for making a profit. We just assume they're open to good welfare but primarily want to be successful. In a funny sort of way, free market enthusiasts and Marxists agree - it's not about the individual businesses, but about how the system is set up.
Similarly, if younger consumers in particular have developed different values, don't blame Costa for responding to them. It's what companies do. If you think the younger consumers are morally wrong, launch a campaign to persuade them otherwise.
Trans people are people. They do not deserve to be buried in the shadows at society's edge. It is still within living memory that if you were gay you could go to prison, if you were black you were second class and if you were female you were little better than chattel.
And the "conservative" elements of society opposed the liberation of every one of those groups.
Another idiot speaks.
You really are being obnoxious today. You don't have any arguments; just insults.
"When Ritchie Herron woke after gender reassignment surgery, he had a feeling he had made a terrible mistake.
Five years later, his scars still sometimes weep and he cannot walk long distances or ride a bike. “I’ve awakened from what was a mental health crisis, to a body that will be for ever changed and damaged,” he said. He no longer identifies as transgender and is living as a gay man “as best I can, given what has happened”."
to Oooh I fancy a decaf cappuccino with sprinkles.
Which just shows that careful psychological assessment should be an essential precursor to life altering treatments.
It's the trivialisation that grates. Fitting a colostomy bag is a life-saving surgery with, at a guess, many fewer patients subsequently regretting the procedure, so why not have a cartoon of one of those?
Regret rate for gender affirming care is between 1% - 5%
Do you think it’s going to stay there given
1) the woeful lack of follow up, now being corrected,
2) the substantial increase in the number of surgeries performed and
3) the significant expansion of treatment beyond the cohort that the Dutch study used - the basis for all this “care”?
Do you agree with Dr Helen Webberley that gender dysphoria is a mental health issue that, virtually uniquely among mental illnesses can be treated by surgery?
"Some studies suggest that rates of regret have declined over the years as patient selection and treatment methods have improved. In a review of 27 studies involving almost 8,000 teens and adults who had transgender surgeries, mostly in Europe, the U.S and Canada, 1% on average expressed regret. For some, regret was temporary, but a small number went on to have detransitioning or reversal surgeries, the 2021 review said."
Do you have a citation suggesting otherwise?
I doubt it. The anti-trans brigade only ever seem to trot out the same small number of detransioners whenever this topic is brought up. If trans-related surgeries were as full of regret as they claim where are all the others? They can’t all be cowering in fear of those terrible trans activists we keep being warned about.
All this anti-surgery campaigning infantilises those who choose that path. Bodily autonomy matters: people get to choose what they do with & to their own bodies. They also get to own the consequences. So long as they get appropriate counselling to enable them to make informed consent, who are we to prevent them from making changes to their own bodies?
YOU HAVE *LOST*.
Have you not being paying attention to how your lot have had your arse handed to you on a plate over the last year?
It has destroyed the SNP, Tavistock is neutered and even the Labour Party has changed it's position.
Castel sant Angelo in Rome? Originally a tomb but then turned into a castle. Great location, brilliant history
It's a bit 'over touristy', but the Tower of London deserves a shout. Proper Castle, great location, great history.
Edit: Apologies, just read that was mentioned initially.
Rochester is good - less touristy, fewer later agglomerations, but also a massive Norman keep. Norwich is also good but now a museum (none the worse for that).
Any list of great castles that doesn't have Edinburgh on it is bullshit
Stirling edges it, I think; but only just. Edinburgh also scores as a scenic castle which was a geographical choke point for exactly the reasons of the scenery. Tantallon for its coastal location near the Bass Rock. Crichton for its amazingly Italianate interior after a grim outside.
Stirling was, of course, featured heavily in Monty Python's Holy Grail. As was Castle Stalker (Castle Argh)
I find if you substitute the phrase "political correctness gone mad" for "woke" then it tells you all you need to know about the user of the word "woke".
Totally wrong, and another sign of limited intellect and ability to think.
Do you think telling people they have a limited intellect and inability to think helps?
Yes, it might shake them out of parroting shibboleths they've picked up by reading the Guardian and other MSM broadcast media (like sheep) and shame them into reflecting on formulating their own point of view.
Nothing else jolts them like invective, so invective it is.
Well I think you are wrong. I don't have a strong view on this argument one way or the other and am willing to be persuaded, hence not posting on it, but your last umpteen posts haven't dealt with any of the counter arguments but just consist of insults about the intelligence of people who are clearly quite bright.
Any list of great castles that doesn't have Edinburgh on it is bullshit
Stirling edges it, I think; but only just. Edinburgh also scores as a scenic castle which was a geographical choke point for exactly the reasons of the scenery. Tantallon for its coastal location near the Bass Rock. Crichton for its amazingly Italianate interior after a grim outside.
Stirling was, of course, featured heavily in Monty Python's Holy Grail. As was Castle Stalker (Castle Argh)
Dollar, surely? But I am not an expert on MP let alone locations. Though I think Stirling doubled as Colditz in the BBC series about 1970.
Edit: belay that - I'm thinking of Doune not Dollar (imperfect memories of reading the Historic Scotland members mag).
"When Ritchie Herron woke after gender reassignment surgery, he had a feeling he had made a terrible mistake.
Five years later, his scars still sometimes weep and he cannot walk long distances or ride a bike. “I’ve awakened from what was a mental health crisis, to a body that will be for ever changed and damaged,” he said. He no longer identifies as transgender and is living as a gay man “as best I can, given what has happened”."
to Oooh I fancy a decaf cappuccino with sprinkles.
Which just shows that careful psychological assessment should be an essential precursor to life altering treatments.
It's the trivialisation that grates. Fitting a colostomy bag is a life-saving surgery with, at a guess, many fewer patients subsequently regretting the procedure, so why not have a cartoon of one of those?
Regret rate for gender affirming care is between 1% - 5%
Do you think it’s going to stay there given
1) the woeful lack of follow up, now being corrected,
2) the substantial increase in the number of surgeries performed and
3) the significant expansion of treatment beyond the cohort that the Dutch study used - the basis for all this “care”?
Do you agree with Dr Helen Webberley that gender dysphoria is a mental health issue that, virtually uniquely among mental illnesses can be treated by surgery?
"Some studies suggest that rates of regret have declined over the years as patient selection and treatment methods have improved. In a review of 27 studies involving almost 8,000 teens and adults who had transgender surgeries, mostly in Europe, the U.S and Canada, 1% on average expressed regret. For some, regret was temporary, but a small number went on to have detransitioning or reversal surgeries, the 2021 review said."
Do you have a citation suggesting otherwise?
I doubt it. The anti-trans brigade only ever seem to trot out the same small number of detransioners whenever this topic is brought up. If trans-related surgeries were as full of regret as they claim where are all the others? They can’t all be cowering in fear of those terrible trans activists we keep being warned about.
All this anti-surgery campaigning infantilises those who choose that path. Bodily autonomy matters: people get to choose what they do with & to their own bodies. They also get to own the consequences. So long as they get appropriate counselling to enable them to make informed consent, who are we to prevent them from making changes to their own bodies?
You must be so proud of what has happened to Ritchie herron
When Ritchie Herron woke after gender reassignment surgery, he had a feeling he had made a terrible mistake.
Five years later, his scars still sometimes weep and he cannot walk long distances or ride a bike.
...
“Today, despite multiple follow-up surgeries, my scar lines still weep, occasionally becoming inflamed and causing crippling pain. In the flesh cavity that was created to mimic a vagina, I feel mostly nothing, aside from the occasional stabs of pain. I can’t use the toilet properly . . . and no matter how hard I push or strain, a dribble emerges, which may continue for hours after I have left the seat.”
Omelettes and eggs, hey? And what is truly depressing about you is that you think minding that this happened makes me part of an "anti-trans brigade."
I find if you substitute the phrase "political correctness gone mad" for "woke" then it tells you all you need to know about the user of the word "woke".
Totally wrong, and another sign of limited intellect and ability to think.
Do you think telling people they have a limited intellect and inability to think helps?
Yes, it might shake them out of parroting shibboleths they've picked up by reading the Guardian and other MSM broadcast media (like sheep) and shame them into reflecting on formulating their own point of view.
Nothing else jolts them like invective, so invective it is.
Well I think you are wrong. I don't have a strong view on this argument one way or the other and am willing to be persuaded, hence not posting on it, but your last umpteen posts haven't dealt with any of the counter arguments but just consist of insults about the intelligence of people who are clearly quite bright.
They are thick. And I completely right, and they are completely wrong.
Costa coffee and pastries are dreck. The ad is virtue signalling.
But also, If folks want to get top surgery, let them. Casino Royale is an angry nutter. Getting pissy about woke, heat pumps and LTNs is going to bore everyone shitless.
On topic, Boycott Costa. They've picked a side and need to be punished for it.
That's the only way Woke Capitalism and these Culture Wars end.
I won't be buying anything there for the foreseeable.
CR: Oh no, not the trans topic again *eye roll emoji*
Also CR: Boycott Costa for showing a trans person in an advert.
What is "Woke Capitalism"? What are the "Culture Wars"? Do you also believe in "Cultural Marxism" or the like?
Can Capitalism really ever truly be woke? Back in the early 00s Disney was very squeamish about 'gay stuff', seemed to recoil away from anything that might hint at the whiff of same-sex relationships. Because they calculated they would turn more people off, which would hit their bottom line.
Now things have changed, and there is more to gain by embracing LGB than being silent. The T is just a bit behind that. If companies are right, then by embracing Trans issues, they'll make some more money than they otherwise might have. If they're wrong, they'll lose money and their businesses can be replaced by their competitors.
Companies aren't being "woke" (not that I know what some people mean by that) - they either market things they think will appeal to people with dispensable income, or they do things to cover their arses from lawsuits. They don't care about inclusion or diversity or whatever; they care about profit.
Yes, one can save a lot of time by recognising that (obviously there will be exceptions, as for every generalisation) If one doesn't like a system, work to change it, don't mess about targeting individual companies operating within it. There are three ways to effect change in a democratic market economy:
1. Pass a law making it mandatory 2. Change regulations to make it profitable for companies to do what you want 3. Encourage consumer behaviour to achieve the same effect.
In my less contentious sphere, we try to persuade Government (1) to mandate an end to live exports, (2) to provide subsidies to farmers transitioning from factory farming to less unpleasant systems and (3) introduce labelling of higher-welfare meat so consumers can vote with their wallets (as they did for eggs) and farmers can increase sales by responding to (2). What we don't do, by and large, is appeal to companies' better natures or condemn anyone for making a profit. We just assume they're open to good welfare but primarily want to be successful. In a funny sort of way, free market enthusiasts and Marxists agree - it's not about the individual businesses, but about how the system is set up.
Similarly, if younger consumers in particular have developed different values, don't blame Costa for responding to them. It's what companies do. If you think the younger consumers are morally wrong, launch a campaign to persuade them otherwise.
Trans people are people. They do not deserve to be buried in the shadows at society's edge. It is still within living memory that if you were gay you could go to prison, if you were black you were second class and if you were female you were little better than chattel.
And the "conservative" elements of society opposed the liberation of every one of those groups.
Another idiot speaks.
Indeed you do, but I forgive you. Your spasmodic utterances of moral outrage are like a pleasant old curtain dressing the windows of PB. It adds to the atmosphere of the place and is definitely more colourful than the recent bletherings about cricket.
The blast from the past here is you, actually. Let me guess: in your head you are reliving CND/gay rights/Apartheid sit ins from your early 70s heyday? I'd like to say it was funny and harmless, but consider this: the Mermaids CEO had her son castrated at the age of 16 because her husband was homophobic and the child was gay. She thought he's be OK with a girl. Was "emasculate gays" actually what you were arguing for back in the JCR?
Nothing could be further from the truth.
In the 70s I was as brainwashed as everyone else. I had no time for CND or gays etc.
As I travelled through life I met people who I had been brought up to believe were mad, bad or wrong and learned that they were just people like everyone else.
It is hard to shake off what was inculcated into you in childhood and some people never do.
As for your provocative statements about the Mermaids CEO, I know nothing about her or the charity but if it happened as you state then I have no doubt that some legal recourse will ensue. OTOH if you are just sh*t-stirring then what you have said looks very close to being libellous.
Costa coffee and pastries are dreck. The ad is virtue signalling.
But also, If folks want to get top surgery, let them. Casino Royale is an angry nutter. Getting pissy about woke, heat pumps and LTNs is going to bore everyone shitless.
Thanks for listening to my Ted Talk.
What is a Ted Talk? Were you one of those young gents?
"When Ritchie Herron woke after gender reassignment surgery, he had a feeling he had made a terrible mistake.
Five years later, his scars still sometimes weep and he cannot walk long distances or ride a bike. “I’ve awakened from what was a mental health crisis, to a body that will be for ever changed and damaged,” he said. He no longer identifies as transgender and is living as a gay man “as best I can, given what has happened”."
to Oooh I fancy a decaf cappuccino with sprinkles.
Which just shows that careful psychological assessment should be an essential precursor to life altering treatments.
It's the trivialisation that grates. Fitting a colostomy bag is a life-saving surgery with, at a guess, many fewer patients subsequently regretting the procedure, so why not have a cartoon of one of those?
Regret rate for gender affirming care is between 1% - 5%
Do you think it’s going to stay there given
1) the woeful lack of follow up, now being corrected,
2) the substantial increase in the number of surgeries performed and
3) the significant expansion of treatment beyond the cohort that the Dutch study used - the basis for all this “care”?
Do you agree with Dr Helen Webberley that gender dysphoria is a mental health issue that, virtually uniquely among mental illnesses can be treated by surgery?
"Some studies suggest that rates of regret have declined over the years as patient selection and treatment methods have improved. In a review of 27 studies involving almost 8,000 teens and adults who had transgender surgeries, mostly in Europe, the U.S and Canada, 1% on average expressed regret. For some, regret was temporary, but a small number went on to have detransitioning or reversal surgeries, the 2021 review said."
Do you have a citation suggesting otherwise?
I doubt it. The anti-trans brigade only ever seem to trot out the same small number of detransioners whenever this topic is brought up. If trans-related surgeries were as full of regret as they claim where are all the others? They can’t all be cowering in fear of those terrible trans activists we keep being warned about.
All this anti-surgery campaigning infantilises those who choose that path. Bodily autonomy matters: people get to choose what they do with & to their own bodies. They also get to own the consequences. So long as they get appropriate counselling to enable them to make informed consent, who are we to prevent them from making changes to their own bodies?
You must be so proud of what has happened to Ritchie herron
When Ritchie Herron woke after gender reassignment surgery, he had a feeling he had made a terrible mistake.
Five years later, his scars still sometimes weep and he cannot walk long distances or ride a bike.
...
“Today, despite multiple follow-up surgeries, my scar lines still weep, occasionally becoming inflamed and causing crippling pain. In the flesh cavity that was created to mimic a vagina, I feel mostly nothing, aside from the occasional stabs of pain. I can’t use the toilet properly . . . and no matter how hard I push or strain, a dribble emerges, which may continue for hours after I have left the seat.”
Omelettes and eggs, hey? And what is truly depressing about you is that you think minding that this happened makes me part of an "anti-trans brigade."
and a million other sources you can find for yourself and are pretending you can't.
Do you regard these people merely as collateral damage or as active and malignant traitors?
You can indeed find a small number of people who regret transitioning. Well done - you just made my point for me, again: That’s exactly what I said.
Meanwhile the available evidence is that the overwhelming majority of those who go through surgery after appropriate counselling have no regrets: If that changes, then I might shift my views, but the ground truth that bodily autonomy matters will still remain.
"When Ritchie Herron woke after gender reassignment surgery, he had a feeling he had made a terrible mistake.
Five years later, his scars still sometimes weep and he cannot walk long distances or ride a bike. “I’ve awakened from what was a mental health crisis, to a body that will be for ever changed and damaged,” he said. He no longer identifies as transgender and is living as a gay man “as best I can, given what has happened”."
to Oooh I fancy a decaf cappuccino with sprinkles.
Which just shows that careful psychological assessment should be an essential precursor to life altering treatments.
It's the trivialisation that grates. Fitting a colostomy bag is a life-saving surgery with, at a guess, many fewer patients subsequently regretting the procedure, so why not have a cartoon of one of those?
Regret rate for gender affirming care is between 1% - 5%
Do you think it’s going to stay there given
1) the woeful lack of follow up, now being corrected,
2) the substantial increase in the number of surgeries performed and
3) the significant expansion of treatment beyond the cohort that the Dutch study used - the basis for all this “care”?
Do you agree with Dr Helen Webberley that gender dysphoria is a mental health issue that, virtually uniquely among mental illnesses can be treated by surgery?
"Some studies suggest that rates of regret have declined over the years as patient selection and treatment methods have improved. In a review of 27 studies involving almost 8,000 teens and adults who had transgender surgeries, mostly in Europe, the U.S and Canada, 1% on average expressed regret. For some, regret was temporary, but a small number went on to have detransitioning or reversal surgeries, the 2021 review said."
Do you have a citation suggesting otherwise?
I doubt it. The anti-trans brigade only ever seem to trot out the same small number of detransioners whenever this topic is brought up. If trans-related surgeries were as full of regret as they claim where are all the others? They can’t all be cowering in fear of those terrible trans activists we keep being warned about.
All this anti-surgery campaigning infantilises those who choose that path. Bodily autonomy matters: people get to choose what they do with & to their own bodies. They also get to own the consequences. So long as they get appropriate counselling to enable them to make informed consent, who are we to prevent them from making changes to their own bodies?
You must be so proud of what has happened to Ritchie herron
When Ritchie Herron woke after gender reassignment surgery, he had a feeling he had made a terrible mistake.
Five years later, his scars still sometimes weep and he cannot walk long distances or ride a bike.
...
“Today, despite multiple follow-up surgeries, my scar lines still weep, occasionally becoming inflamed and causing crippling pain. In the flesh cavity that was created to mimic a vagina, I feel mostly nothing, aside from the occasional stabs of pain. I can’t use the toilet properly . . . and no matter how hard I push or strain, a dribble emerges, which may continue for hours after I have left the seat.”
Omelettes and eggs, hey? And what is truly depressing about you is that you think minding that this happened makes me part of an "anti-trans brigade."
and a million other sources you can find for yourself and are pretending you can't.
Do you regard these people merely as collateral damage or as active and malignant traitors?
Didn’t you recently state that you’d had your final word on this subject? Presumably that was for that particular 24 hour period. Or a single hour even.
The panel will work to ensure roles are filled in the rapidly expanding defence and civil nuclear sectors, the Ministry of Defence said.
It will develop a national skills strategy for jobs across the industry, from technical scientific and engineering roles to logistics, project management, commercial and finance, PA Media reports.
The taskforce will be chaired by Sir Simon Bollom, the former chief executive of Defence Equipment and Support, and include government officials, academics and industry partners.
The defence procurement minister, James Cartlidge, said:
By developing nuclear skills, we are not just investing in the UK economy but our national security. The creation of this new taskforce will challenge the whole of the UK’s nuclear sector to be ambitious in addressing the nuclear skills gap, and we are delighted to appoint Sir Simon Bollom to drive this work forward. Bollom said:
The nuclear sector is vital to our nation, and I am proud to have been given the opportunity to lead such an important taskforce to ensure that we have the people and skills we need to deliver our programmes. The nuclear minister, Andrew Bowie, hailed a nuclear “revival” with the launch of Great British Nuclear, an arm’s-length body involved in the government-backed competition to develop smaller-scale nuclear technology projects.
On topic, Boycott Costa. They've picked a side and need to be punished for it.
That's the only way Woke Capitalism and these Culture Wars end.
I won't be buying anything there for the foreseeable.
CR: Oh no, not the trans topic again *eye roll emoji*
Also CR: Boycott Costa for showing a trans person in an advert.
What is "Woke Capitalism"? What are the "Culture Wars"? Do you also believe in "Cultural Marxism" or the like?
Can Capitalism really ever truly be woke? Back in the early 00s Disney was very squeamish about 'gay stuff', seemed to recoil away from anything that might hint at the whiff of same-sex relationships. Because they calculated they would turn more people off, which would hit their bottom line.
Now things have changed, and there is more to gain by embracing LGB than being silent. The T is just a bit behind that. If companies are right, then by embracing Trans issues, they'll make some more money than they otherwise might have. If they're wrong, they'll lose money and their businesses can be replaced by their competitors.
Companies aren't being "woke" (not that I know what some people mean by that) - they either market things they think will appeal to people with dispensable income, or they do things to cover their arses from lawsuits. They don't care about inclusion or diversity or whatever; they care about profit.
Yes, one can save a lot of time by recognising that (obviously there will be exceptions, as for every generalisation) If one doesn't like a system, work to change it, don't mess about targeting individual companies operating within it. There are three ways to effect change in a democratic market economy:
1. Pass a law making it mandatory 2. Change regulations to make it profitable for companies to do what you want 3. Encourage consumer behaviour to achieve the same effect.
In my less contentious sphere, we try to persuade Government (1) to mandate an end to live exports, (2) to provide subsidies to farmers transitioning from factory farming to less unpleasant systems and (3) introduce labelling of higher-welfare meat so consumers can vote with their wallets (as they did for eggs) and farmers can increase sales by responding to (2). What we don't do, by and large, is appeal to companies' better natures or condemn anyone for making a profit. We just assume they're open to good welfare but primarily want to be successful. In a funny sort of way, free market enthusiasts and Marxists agree - it's not about the individual businesses, but about how the system is set up.
Similarly, if younger consumers in particular have developed different values, don't blame Costa for responding to them. It's what companies do. If you think the younger consumers are morally wrong, launch a campaign to persuade them otherwise.
Trans people are people. They do not deserve to be buried in the shadows at society's edge. It is still within living memory that if you were gay you could go to prison, if you were black you were second class and if you were female you were little better than chattel.
And the "conservative" elements of society opposed the liberation of every one of those groups.
Another idiot speaks.
Indeed you do, but I forgive you. Your spasmodic utterances of moral outrage are like a pleasant old curtain dressing the windows of PB. It adds to the atmosphere of the place and is definitely more colourful than the recent bletherings about cricket.
The blast from the past here is you, actually. Let me guess: in your head you are reliving CND/gay rights/Apartheid sit ins from your early 70s heyday? I'd like to say it was funny and harmless, but consider this: the Mermaids CEO had her son castrated at the age of 16 because her husband was homophobic and the child was gay. She thought he's be OK with a girl. Was "emasculate gays" actually what you were arguing for back in the JCR?
Nothing could be further from the truth.
In the 70s I was as brainwashed as everyone else. I had no time for CND or gays etc.
As I travelled through life I met people who I had been brought up to believe were mad, bad or wrong and learned that they were just people like everyone else.
It is hard to shake off what was inculcated into you in childhood and some people never do.
As for your provocative statements about the Mermaids CEO, I know nothing about her or the charity but if it happened as you state then I have no doubt that some legal recourse will ensue. OTOH if you are just sh*t-stirring then what you have said looks very close to being libellous.
Entirely agree. I was the same, too. To my regret now.
"Some studies suggest that rates of regret have declined over the years as patient selection and treatment methods have improved. In a review of 27 studies involving almost 8,000 teens and adults who had transgender surgeries, mostly in Europe, the U.S and Canada, 1% on average expressed regret. For some, regret was temporary, but a small number went on to have detransitioning or reversal surgeries, the 2021 review said."
Do you have a citation suggesting otherwise?
I’ll see your Associated Press article and raise you a letter to Plastic and Reconstructive surgery:
Bustos et al aimed to measure the prevalence of regret following gender-affirmation surgery. Given the significant rise in young people seeking medical intervention for gender dysphoria, which can include surgery, outcome studies that accurately assess regret are of increasing importance. In this letter, we argue that the conclusions of their systematic review and meta-analysis are questionable due to limitations in their methods and shortcomings of the studies selected…..
….A last and major concern involves sample selection. The cohort presenting with gender dysphoria today is substantially different from the cohort presenting during the research periods of the included studies. Further, there has been a significant liberalization over time of the criteria assessing readiness for surgery. Thus, the outcomes reported may be of limited relevance for estimating current surgery outcomes. Additionally, the generalization to “TGNB” populations seems unreliable, as it is based on an explicit sample size of only one “non-binary” patient. The authors do not address these issues.
In light of these numerous issues affecting study quality and data analysis, their conclusion that “our study has shown a very low percentage of regret in TGNB population after GAS” is, in our opinion, unsupported and potentially inaccurate.
This letter shows the problems inherent in systematic reviews and meta-analyses. A systematic review (systemic review, systematic analysis, whatevs) is a summary of studies. A meta-analysis takes the results from two or more studies and combines them to reach a conclusion based on the (putatively) bigger sample size. So a systemic review of bands would take all the rock bands and say the Beatles were the best. A meta-analysis would take the top ten bands and produce an eleventh with Jagger on vocals and Lennon on the lyrics.
Systematic analyses are formalised summary methods, but they are difficult to do right as there is a lot of bureaucracy involved, eg resolving which studies are to be included. Your full formal Cochrane review is not always done, and they can be a bit underdone.
Meta-analyses work on the basis that you can combine studies, which raises the question as to whether the studies are actually combinable. Checking that they are is a step in a proper meta-analysis, but again this is not always done
As for the letter, stating that "this study should have been included/excluded" is a cold read: you can say that about any of them. I agree with the responders about how more recent data may give different results, although their point about generalising to "TGNB" (Transgender and gender non-binary) I think is more about too-enthusiastic use of politically correct terminology.
In short: You both need to be aware that quoting stuff you found on the Internet is not as conclusive as you might think.
"When Ritchie Herron woke after gender reassignment surgery, he had a feeling he had made a terrible mistake.
Five years later, his scars still sometimes weep and he cannot walk long distances or ride a bike. “I’ve awakened from what was a mental health crisis, to a body that will be for ever changed and damaged,” he said. He no longer identifies as transgender and is living as a gay man “as best I can, given what has happened”."
to Oooh I fancy a decaf cappuccino with sprinkles.
Which just shows that careful psychological assessment should be an essential precursor to life altering treatments.
It's the trivialisation that grates. Fitting a colostomy bag is a life-saving surgery with, at a guess, many fewer patients subsequently regretting the procedure, so why not have a cartoon of one of those?
Regret rate for gender affirming care is between 1% - 5%
Do you think it’s going to stay there given
1) the woeful lack of follow up, now being corrected,
2) the substantial increase in the number of surgeries performed and
3) the significant expansion of treatment beyond the cohort that the Dutch study used - the basis for all this “care”?
Do you agree with Dr Helen Webberley that gender dysphoria is a mental health issue that, virtually uniquely among mental illnesses can be treated by surgery?
"Some studies suggest that rates of regret have declined over the years as patient selection and treatment methods have improved. In a review of 27 studies involving almost 8,000 teens and adults who had transgender surgeries, mostly in Europe, the U.S and Canada, 1% on average expressed regret. For some, regret was temporary, but a small number went on to have detransitioning or reversal surgeries, the 2021 review said."
Do you have a citation suggesting otherwise?
I doubt it. The anti-trans brigade only ever seem to trot out the same small number of detransioners whenever this topic is brought up. If trans-related surgeries were as full of regret as they claim where are all the others? They can’t all be cowering in fear of those terrible trans activists we keep being warned about.
All this anti-surgery campaigning infantilises those who choose that path. Bodily autonomy matters: people get to choose what they do with & to their own bodies. They also get to own the consequences. So long as they get appropriate counselling to enable them to make informed consent, who are we to prevent them from making changes to their own bodies?
You must be so proud of what has happened to Ritchie herron
When Ritchie Herron woke after gender reassignment surgery, he had a feeling he had made a terrible mistake.
Five years later, his scars still sometimes weep and he cannot walk long distances or ride a bike.
...
“Today, despite multiple follow-up surgeries, my scar lines still weep, occasionally becoming inflamed and causing crippling pain. In the flesh cavity that was created to mimic a vagina, I feel mostly nothing, aside from the occasional stabs of pain. I can’t use the toilet properly . . . and no matter how hard I push or strain, a dribble emerges, which may continue for hours after I have left the seat.”
Omelettes and eggs, hey? And what is truly depressing about you is that you think minding that this happened makes me part of an "anti-trans brigade."
and a million other sources you can find for yourself and are pretending you can't.
Do you regard these people merely as collateral damage or as active and malignant traitors?
Didn’t you recently state that you’d had your final word on this subject? Presumably that was for that particular 24 hour period. Or a single hour even.
I said penultimate. Always getting complaints about my handwriting.
"When Ritchie Herron woke after gender reassignment surgery, he had a feeling he had made a terrible mistake.
Five years later, his scars still sometimes weep and he cannot walk long distances or ride a bike. “I’ve awakened from what was a mental health crisis, to a body that will be for ever changed and damaged,” he said. He no longer identifies as transgender and is living as a gay man “as best I can, given what has happened”."
to Oooh I fancy a decaf cappuccino with sprinkles.
Which just shows that careful psychological assessment should be an essential precursor to life altering treatments.
It's the trivialisation that grates. Fitting a colostomy bag is a life-saving surgery with, at a guess, many fewer patients subsequently regretting the procedure, so why not have a cartoon of one of those?
Regret rate for gender affirming care is between 1% - 5%
Do you think it’s going to stay there given
1) the woeful lack of follow up, now being corrected,
2) the substantial increase in the number of surgeries performed and
3) the significant expansion of treatment beyond the cohort that the Dutch study used - the basis for all this “care”?
Do you agree with Dr Helen Webberley that gender dysphoria is a mental health issue that, virtually uniquely among mental illnesses can be treated by surgery?
"Some studies suggest that rates of regret have declined over the years as patient selection and treatment methods have improved. In a review of 27 studies involving almost 8,000 teens and adults who had transgender surgeries, mostly in Europe, the U.S and Canada, 1% on average expressed regret. For some, regret was temporary, but a small number went on to have detransitioning or reversal surgeries, the 2021 review said."
Do you have a citation suggesting otherwise?
I doubt it. The anti-trans brigade only ever seem to trot out the same small number of detransioners whenever this topic is brought up. If trans-related surgeries were as full of regret as they claim where are all the others? They can’t all be cowering in fear of those terrible trans activists we keep being warned about.
All this anti-surgery campaigning infantilises those who choose that path. Bodily autonomy matters: people get to choose what they do with & to their own bodies. They also get to own the consequences. So long as they get appropriate counselling to enable them to make informed consent, who are we to prevent them from making changes to their own bodies?
You must be so proud of what has happened to Ritchie herron
When Ritchie Herron woke after gender reassignment surgery, he had a feeling he had made a terrible mistake.
Five years later, his scars still sometimes weep and he cannot walk long distances or ride a bike.
...
“Today, despite multiple follow-up surgeries, my scar lines still weep, occasionally becoming inflamed and causing crippling pain. In the flesh cavity that was created to mimic a vagina, I feel mostly nothing, aside from the occasional stabs of pain. I can’t use the toilet properly . . . and no matter how hard I push or strain, a dribble emerges, which may continue for hours after I have left the seat.”
Omelettes and eggs, hey? And what is truly depressing about you is that you think minding that this happened makes me part of an "anti-trans brigade."
and a million other sources you can find for yourself and are pretending you can't.
Do you regard these people merely as collateral damage or as active and malignant traitors?
People can be detransitioners or regret their transition and it still be the best treatment for most people with their symptoms; they should get the necessary support they need afterwards. This isn't zero sum - we can do both. Nor is it omelettes and eggs - because these individuals consent at the time, thinking it is the best course of treatment. Sometimes people are wrong about that. Do you want to ban legal abortion because of the minority of people who regret their abortion, or who suffer complications because of it?
Most medicine contains a degree of risk - and everyone is made aware of that before hand. They have to - it is the law. If any of these doctors or the NHS did not follow that law, then fine, sue em. But I doubt they didn't, because you have to do it with all other healthcare as well.
The panel will work to ensure roles are filled in the rapidly expanding defence and civil nuclear sectors, the Ministry of Defence said.
It will develop a national skills strategy for jobs across the industry, from technical scientific and engineering roles to logistics, project management, commercial and finance, PA Media reports.
The taskforce will be chaired by Sir Simon Bollom, the former chief executive of Defence Equipment and Support, and include government officials, academics and industry partners.
The defence procurement minister, James Cartlidge, said:
By developing nuclear skills, we are not just investing in the UK economy but our national security. The creation of this new taskforce will challenge the whole of the UK’s nuclear sector to be ambitious in addressing the nuclear skills gap, and we are delighted to appoint Sir Simon Bollom to drive this work forward. Bollom said:
The nuclear sector is vital to our nation, and I am proud to have been given the opportunity to lead such an important taskforce to ensure that we have the people and skills we need to deliver our programmes. The nuclear minister, Andrew Bowie, hailed a nuclear “revival” with the launch of Great British Nuclear, an arm’s-length body involved in the government-backed competition to develop smaller-scale nuclear technology projects.
Just give Rolls Royce a contract for the first half a dozen of their SMRs, and let them get their production line up and running.
The Americans have started building their SMR factory already.
Costa coffee and pastries are dreck. The ad is virtue signalling.
But also, If folks want to get top surgery, let them. Casino Royale is an angry nutter. Getting pissy about woke, heat pumps and LTNs is going to bore everyone shitless.
Thanks for listening to my Ted Talk.
You're an angry nutter; I am perfectly rational and sane.
"Some studies suggest that rates of regret have declined over the years as patient selection and treatment methods have improved. In a review of 27 studies involving almost 8,000 teens and adults who had transgender surgeries, mostly in Europe, the U.S and Canada, 1% on average expressed regret. For some, regret was temporary, but a small number went on to have detransitioning or reversal surgeries, the 2021 review said."
Do you have a citation suggesting otherwise?
I’ll see your Associated Press article and raise you a letter to Plastic and Reconstructive surgery:
Bustos et al aimed to measure the prevalence of regret following gender-affirmation surgery. Given the significant rise in young people seeking medical intervention for gender dysphoria, which can include surgery, outcome studies that accurately assess regret are of increasing importance. In this letter, we argue that the conclusions of their systematic review and meta-analysis are questionable due to limitations in their methods and shortcomings of the studies selected…..
….A last and major concern involves sample selection. The cohort presenting with gender dysphoria today is substantially different from the cohort presenting during the research periods of the included studies. Further, there has been a significant liberalization over time of the criteria assessing readiness for surgery. Thus, the outcomes reported may be of limited relevance for estimating current surgery outcomes. Additionally, the generalization to “TGNB” populations seems unreliable, as it is based on an explicit sample size of only one “non-binary” patient. The authors do not address these issues.
In light of these numerous issues affecting study quality and data analysis, their conclusion that “our study has shown a very low percentage of regret in TGNB population after GAS” is, in our opinion, unsupported and potentially inaccurate.
This letter shows the problems inherent in systematic reviews and meta-analyses. A systematic review (systemic review, systematic analysis, whatevs) is a summary of studies. A meta-analysis takes the results from two or more studies and combines them to reach a conclusion based on the (putatively) bigger sample size. So a systemic review of bands would take all the rock bands and say the Beatles were the best. A meta-analysis would take the top ten bands and produce an eleventh with Jagger on vocals and Lennon on the lyrics.
Systematic analyses are formalised summary methods, but they are difficult to do right as there is a lot of bureaucracy involved, eg resolving which studies are to be included. Your full formal Cochrane review is not always done, and they can be a bit underdone.
Meta-analyses work on the basis that you can combine studies, which raises the question as to whether the studies are actually combinable. Checking that they are is a step in a proper meta-analysis, but again this is not always done
As for the letter, stating that "this study should have been included/excluded" is a cold read: you can say that about any of them. I agree with the responders about how more recent data may give different results, although their point about generalising to "TGNB" (Transgender and gender non-binary) I think is more about too-enthusiastic use of politically correct terminology.
In short: You both need to be aware that quoting stuff you found on the Internet is not as conclusive as you might think.
"Some studies suggest that rates of regret have declined over the years as patient selection and treatment methods have improved. In a review of 27 studies involving almost 8,000 teens and adults who had transgender surgeries, mostly in Europe, the U.S and Canada, 1% on average expressed regret. For some, regret was temporary, but a small number went on to have detransitioning or reversal surgeries, the 2021 review said."
Do you have a citation suggesting otherwise?
I’ll see your Associated Press article and raise you a letter to Plastic and Reconstructive surgery:
Bustos et al aimed to measure the prevalence of regret following gender-affirmation surgery. Given the significant rise in young people seeking medical intervention for gender dysphoria, which can include surgery, outcome studies that accurately assess regret are of increasing importance. In this letter, we argue that the conclusions of their systematic review and meta-analysis are questionable due to limitations in their methods and shortcomings of the studies selected…..
….A last and major concern involves sample selection. The cohort presenting with gender dysphoria today is substantially different from the cohort presenting during the research periods of the included studies. Further, there has been a significant liberalization over time of the criteria assessing readiness for surgery. Thus, the outcomes reported may be of limited relevance for estimating current surgery outcomes. Additionally, the generalization to “TGNB” populations seems unreliable, as it is based on an explicit sample size of only one “non-binary” patient. The authors do not address these issues.
In light of these numerous issues affecting study quality and data analysis, their conclusion that “our study has shown a very low percentage of regret in TGNB population after GAS” is, in our opinion, unsupported and potentially inaccurate.
This letter shows the problems inherent in systematic reviews and meta-analyses. A systematic review (systemic review, systematic analysis, whatevs) is a summary of studies. A meta-analysis takes the results from two or more studies and combines them to reach a conclusion based on the (putatively) bigger sample size. So a systemic review of bands would take all the rock bands and say the Beatles were the best. A meta-analysis would take the top ten bands and produce an eleventh with Jagger on vocals and Lennon on the lyrics.
Systematic analyses are formalised summary methods, but they are difficult to do right as there is a lot of bureaucracy involved, eg resolving which studies are to be included. Your full formal Cochrane review is not always done, and they can be a bit underdone.
Meta-analyses work on the basis that you can combine studies, which raises the question as to whether the studies are actually combinable. Checking that they are is a step in a proper meta-analysis, but again this is not always done
As for the letter, stating that "this study should have been included/excluded" is a cold read: you can say that about any of them. I agree with the responders about how more recent data may give different results, although their point about generalising to "TGNB" (Transgender and gender non-binary) I think is more about too-enthusiastic use of politically correct terminology.
In short: You both need to be aware that quoting stuff you found on the Internet is not as conclusive as you might think.
Top trolling!
It was actually meant to be educational, not trolling. I wasn't taking the piss!
"Some studies suggest that rates of regret have declined over the years as patient selection and treatment methods have improved. In a review of 27 studies involving almost 8,000 teens and adults who had transgender surgeries, mostly in Europe, the U.S and Canada, 1% on average expressed regret. For some, regret was temporary, but a small number went on to have detransitioning or reversal surgeries, the 2021 review said."
Do you have a citation suggesting otherwise?
I’ll see your Associated Press article and raise you a letter to Plastic and Reconstructive surgery:
Bustos et al aimed to measure the prevalence of regret following gender-affirmation surgery. Given the significant rise in young people seeking medical intervention for gender dysphoria, which can include surgery, outcome studies that accurately assess regret are of increasing importance. In this letter, we argue that the conclusions of their systematic review and meta-analysis are questionable due to limitations in their methods and shortcomings of the studies selected…..
….A last and major concern involves sample selection. The cohort presenting with gender dysphoria today is substantially different from the cohort presenting during the research periods of the included studies. Further, there has been a significant liberalization over time of the criteria assessing readiness for surgery. Thus, the outcomes reported may be of limited relevance for estimating current surgery outcomes. Additionally, the generalization to “TGNB” populations seems unreliable, as it is based on an explicit sample size of only one “non-binary” patient. The authors do not address these issues.
In light of these numerous issues affecting study quality and data analysis, their conclusion that “our study has shown a very low percentage of regret in TGNB population after GAS” is, in our opinion, unsupported and potentially inaccurate.
This letter shows the problems inherent in systematic reviews and meta-analyses. A systematic review (systemic review, systematic analysis, whatevs) is a summary of studies. A meta-analysis takes the results from two or more studies and combines them to reach a conclusion based on the (putatively) bigger sample size. So a systemic review of bands would take all the rock bands and say the Beatles were the best. A meta-analysis would take the top ten bands and produce an eleventh with Jagger on vocals and Lennon on the lyrics.
Systematic analyses are formalised summary methods, but they are difficult to do right as there is a lot of bureaucracy involved, eg resolving which studies are to be included. Your full formal Cochrane review is not always done, and they can be a bit underdone.
Meta-analyses work on the basis that you can combine studies, which raises the question as to whether the studies are actually combinable. Checking that they are is a step in a proper meta-analysis, but again this is not always done
As for the letter, stating that "this study should have been included/excluded" is a cold read: you can say that about any of them. I agree with the responders about how more recent data may give different results, although their point about generalising to "TGNB" (Transgender and gender non-binary) I think is more about too-enthusiastic use of politically correct terminology.
In short: You both need to be aware that quoting stuff you found on the Internet is not as conclusive as you might think.
The conclusion I am drawing is “we don’t know”.
The interim Cass review found studies conducted so far were of “low” or “very low” quality. I have seen nothing that suggests that view is wrong.
The U.K. systematic reviews found the available research to be of “very low” quality — meaning that there is very low certainty that an observed effect, like reduced suicidality, is due to the intervention, and therefore the studies’ claimed results are unlikely to represent the truth.
On topic, Boycott Costa. They've picked a side and need to be punished for it.
That's the only way Woke Capitalism and these Culture Wars end.
I won't be buying anything there for the foreseeable.
CR: Oh no, not the trans topic again *eye roll emoji*
Also CR: Boycott Costa for showing a trans person in an advert.
What is "Woke Capitalism"? What are the "Culture Wars"? Do you also believe in "Cultural Marxism" or the like?
Can Capitalism really ever truly be woke? Back in the early 00s Disney was very squeamish about 'gay stuff', seemed to recoil away from anything that might hint at the whiff of same-sex relationships. Because they calculated they would turn more people off, which would hit their bottom line.
Now things have changed, and there is more to gain by embracing LGB than being silent. The T is just a bit behind that. If companies are right, then by embracing Trans issues, they'll make some more money than they otherwise might have. If they're wrong, they'll lose money and their businesses can be replaced by their competitors.
Companies aren't being "woke" (not that I know what some people mean by that) - they either market things they think will appeal to people with dispensable income, or they do things to cover their arses from lawsuits. They don't care about inclusion or diversity or whatever; they care about profit.
Yes, one can save a lot of time by recognising that (obviously there will be exceptions, as for every generalisation) If one doesn't like a system, work to change it, don't mess about targeting individual companies operating within it. There are three ways to effect change in a democratic market economy:
1. Pass a law making it mandatory 2. Change regulations to make it profitable for companies to do what you want 3. Encourage consumer behaviour to achieve the same effect.
In my less contentious sphere, we try to persuade Government (1) to mandate an end to live exports, (2) to provide subsidies to farmers transitioning from factory farming to less unpleasant systems and (3) introduce labelling of higher-welfare meat so consumers can vote with their wallets (as they did for eggs) and farmers can increase sales by responding to (2). What we don't do, by and large, is appeal to companies' better natures or condemn anyone for making a profit. We just assume they're open to good welfare but primarily want to be successful. In a funny sort of way, free market enthusiasts and Marxists agree - it's not about the individual businesses, but about how the system is set up.
Similarly, if younger consumers in particular have developed different values, don't blame Costa for responding to them. It's what companies do. If you think the younger consumers are morally wrong, launch a campaign to persuade them otherwise.
Trans people are people. They do not deserve to be buried in the shadows at society's edge. It is still within living memory that if you were gay you could go to prison, if you were black you were second class and if you were female you were little better than chattel.
And the "conservative" elements of society opposed the liberation of every one of those groups.
Another idiot speaks.
Indeed you do, but I forgive you. Your spasmodic utterances of moral outrage are like a pleasant old curtain dressing the windows of PB. It adds to the atmosphere of the place and is definitely more colourful than the recent bletherings about cricket.
The blast from the past here is you, actually. Let me guess: in your head you are reliving CND/gay rights/Apartheid sit ins from your early 70s heyday? I'd like to say it was funny and harmless, but consider this: the Mermaids CEO had her son castrated at the age of 16 because her husband was homophobic and the child was gay. She thought he's be OK with a girl. Was "emasculate gays" actually what you were arguing for back in the JCR?
Nothing could be further from the truth.
In the 70s I was as brainwashed as everyone else. I had no time for CND or gays etc.
As I travelled through life I met people who I had been brought up to believe were mad, bad or wrong and learned that they were just people like everyone else.
It is hard to shake off what was inculcated into you in childhood and some people never do.
As for your provocative statements about the Mermaids CEO, I know nothing about her or the charity but if it happened as you state then I have no doubt that some legal recourse will ensue. OTOH if you are just sh*t-stirring then what you have said looks very close to being libellous.
And, now, you've been brainwashed the other way.
The common thread here is your susceptibility and weakness of character to brainwashing. It's why I was embarrassed by your BOO posts before the Brexit referendum, despite being on the same side, and have such contempt for your Bregret posts now.
I respect those who think for themselves and have the integrity and intelligence to progressively engage with an argument, and not endlessly repeat shibbotleths regardless of where it goes.
On topic, Boycott Costa. They've picked a side and need to be punished for it.
That's the only way Woke Capitalism and these Culture Wars end.
I won't be buying anything there for the foreseeable.
CR: Oh no, not the trans topic again *eye roll emoji*
Also CR: Boycott Costa for showing a trans person in an advert.
What is "Woke Capitalism"? What are the "Culture Wars"? Do you also believe in "Cultural Marxism" or the like?
Can Capitalism really ever truly be woke? Back in the early 00s Disney was very squeamish about 'gay stuff', seemed to recoil away from anything that might hint at the whiff of same-sex relationships. Because they calculated they would turn more people off, which would hit their bottom line.
Now things have changed, and there is more to gain by embracing LGB than being silent. The T is just a bit behind that. If companies are right, then by embracing Trans issues, they'll make some more money than they otherwise might have. If they're wrong, they'll lose money and their businesses can be replaced by their competitors.
Companies aren't being "woke" (not that I know what some people mean by that) - they either market things they think will appeal to people with dispensable income, or they do things to cover their arses from lawsuits. They don't care about inclusion or diversity or whatever; they care about profit.
Yes, one can save a lot of time by recognising that (obviously there will be exceptions, as for every generalisation) If one doesn't like a system, work to change it, don't mess about targeting individual companies operating within it. There are three ways to effect change in a democratic market economy:
1. Pass a law making it mandatory 2. Change regulations to make it profitable for companies to do what you want 3. Encourage consumer behaviour to achieve the same effect.
In my less contentious sphere, we try to persuade Government (1) to mandate an end to live exports, (2) to provide subsidies to farmers transitioning from factory farming to less unpleasant systems and (3) introduce labelling of higher-welfare meat so consumers can vote with their wallets (as they did for eggs) and farmers can increase sales by responding to (2). What we don't do, by and large, is appeal to companies' better natures or condemn anyone for making a profit. We just assume they're open to good welfare but primarily want to be successful. In a funny sort of way, free market enthusiasts and Marxists agree - it's not about the individual businesses, but about how the system is set up.
Similarly, if younger consumers in particular have developed different values, don't blame Costa for responding to them. It's what companies do. If you think the younger consumers are morally wrong, launch a campaign to persuade them otherwise.
Trans people are people. They do not deserve to be buried in the shadows at society's edge. It is still within living memory that if you were gay you could go to prison, if you were black you were second class and if you were female you were little better than chattel.
And the "conservative" elements of society opposed the liberation of every one of those groups.
Another idiot speaks.
Indeed you do, but I forgive you. Your spasmodic utterances of moral outrage are like a pleasant old curtain dressing the windows of PB. It adds to the atmosphere of the place and is definitely more colourful than the recent bletherings about cricket.
The blast from the past here is you, actually. Let me guess: in your head you are reliving CND/gay rights/Apartheid sit ins from your early 70s heyday? I'd like to say it was funny and harmless, but consider this: the Mermaids CEO had her son castrated at the age of 16 because her husband was homophobic and the child was gay. She thought he's be OK with a girl. Was "emasculate gays" actually what you were arguing for back in the JCR?
Nothing could be further from the truth.
In the 70s I was as brainwashed as everyone else. I had no time for CND or gays etc.
As I travelled through life I met people who I had been brought up to believe were mad, bad or wrong and learned that they were just people like everyone else.
It is hard to shake off what was inculcated into you in childhood and some people never do.
As for your provocative statements about the Mermaids CEO, I know nothing about her or the charity but if it happened as you state then I have no doubt that some legal recourse will ensue. OTOH if you are just sh*t-stirring then what you have said looks very close to being libellous.
And, now, you've been brainwashed the other way.
The common thread here is your susceptibility and weakness of character to brainwashing. It's why I was embarrassed by your BOO posts before the Brexit referendum, despite being on the same side, and have such contempt for your Bregret posts now.
I respect those who think for themselves and have the integrity and intelligence to progressively engage with an argument, and not endlessly repeat shibbotleths regardless of where it goes.
Learn from it. Your life will be better.
You sould exactly like the Moonies I once met when I was a teenager (and had the sense to steer clear of).
"When Ritchie Herron woke after gender reassignment surgery, he had a feeling he had made a terrible mistake.
Five years later, his scars still sometimes weep and he cannot walk long distances or ride a bike. “I’ve awakened from what was a mental health crisis, to a body that will be for ever changed and damaged,” he said. He no longer identifies as transgender and is living as a gay man “as best I can, given what has happened”."
to Oooh I fancy a decaf cappuccino with sprinkles.
Which just shows that careful psychological assessment should be an essential precursor to life altering treatments.
It's the trivialisation that grates. Fitting a colostomy bag is a life-saving surgery with, at a guess, many fewer patients subsequently regretting the procedure, so why not have a cartoon of one of those?
Regret rate for gender affirming care is between 1% - 5%
Do you think it’s going to stay there given
1) the woeful lack of follow up, now being corrected,
2) the substantial increase in the number of surgeries performed and
3) the significant expansion of treatment beyond the cohort that the Dutch study used - the basis for all this “care”?
Do you agree with Dr Helen Webberley that gender dysphoria is a mental health issue that, virtually uniquely among mental illnesses can be treated by surgery?
"Some studies suggest that rates of regret have declined over the years as patient selection and treatment methods have improved. In a review of 27 studies involving almost 8,000 teens and adults who had transgender surgeries, mostly in Europe, the U.S and Canada, 1% on average expressed regret. For some, regret was temporary, but a small number went on to have detransitioning or reversal surgeries, the 2021 review said."
Do you have a citation suggesting otherwise?
I doubt it. The anti-trans brigade only ever seem to trot out the same small number of detransioners whenever this topic is brought up. If trans-related surgeries were as full of regret as they claim where are all the others? They can’t all be cowering in fear of those terrible trans activists we keep being warned about.
All this anti-surgery campaigning infantilises those who choose that path. Bodily autonomy matters: people get to choose what they do with & to their own bodies. They also get to own the consequences. So long as they get appropriate counselling to enable them to make informed consent, who are we to prevent them from making changes to their own bodies?
You must be so proud of what has happened to Ritchie herron
When Ritchie Herron woke after gender reassignment surgery, he had a feeling he had made a terrible mistake.
Five years later, his scars still sometimes weep and he cannot walk long distances or ride a bike.
...
“Today, despite multiple follow-up surgeries, my scar lines still weep, occasionally becoming inflamed and causing crippling pain. In the flesh cavity that was created to mimic a vagina, I feel mostly nothing, aside from the occasional stabs of pain. I can’t use the toilet properly . . . and no matter how hard I push or strain, a dribble emerges, which may continue for hours after I have left the seat.”
Omelettes and eggs, hey? And what is truly depressing about you is that you think minding that this happened makes me part of an "anti-trans brigade."
and a million other sources you can find for yourself and are pretending you can't.
Do you regard these people merely as collateral damage or as active and malignant traitors?
You can indeed find a small number of people who regret transitioning. Well done - you just made my point for me, again: That’s exactly what I said.
Meanwhile the available evidence is that the overwhelming majority of those who go through surgery after appropriate counselling have no regrets: If that changes, then I might shift my views, but the ground truth that bodily autonomy matters will still remain.
I see how you smuggled "small" in there. A master class in question-begging.
I think people who benefit from sex change surgery should have it, people who will not benefit should not, and we should make every effort to distinguish between the two. You think Yay! Trans! New, groovy, with it and down with da kidz. Budweiser! Costa! Death to those who oppose some instances of it, and let's pretend that opposing some instances of it is just a cover for opposing it in general. Because my target audience is easily stupid enough to believe that.
The panel will work to ensure roles are filled in the rapidly expanding defence and civil nuclear sectors, the Ministry of Defence said.
It will develop a national skills strategy for jobs across the industry, from technical scientific and engineering roles to logistics, project management, commercial and finance, PA Media reports.
The taskforce will be chaired by Sir Simon Bollom, the former chief executive of Defence Equipment and Support, and include government officials, academics and industry partners.
The defence procurement minister, James Cartlidge, said:
By developing nuclear skills, we are not just investing in the UK economy but our national security. The creation of this new taskforce will challenge the whole of the UK’s nuclear sector to be ambitious in addressing the nuclear skills gap, and we are delighted to appoint Sir Simon Bollom to drive this work forward. Bollom said:
The nuclear sector is vital to our nation, and I am proud to have been given the opportunity to lead such an important taskforce to ensure that we have the people and skills we need to deliver our programmes. The nuclear minister, Andrew Bowie, hailed a nuclear “revival” with the launch of Great British Nuclear, an arm’s-length body involved in the government-backed competition to develop smaller-scale nuclear technology projects.
Just give Rolls Royce a contract for the first half a dozen of their SMRs, and let them get their production line up and running.
They've already had 500m quid of taxpayers' money without producing anything in particular so maybe not.
Any SMR site is going to be litigated and protested to death anyway. It's all a complete waste of time and money.
I find if you substitute the phrase "political correctness gone mad" for "woke" then it tells you all you need to know about the user of the word "woke".
Totally wrong, and another sign of limited intellect and ability to think.
Do you think telling people they have a limited intellect and inability to think helps?
Yes, it might shake them out of parroting shibboleths they've picked up by reading the Guardian and other MSM broadcast media (like sheep) and shame them into reflecting on formulating their own point of view.
Nothing else jolts them like invective, so invective it is.
Well I think you are wrong. I don't have a strong view on this argument one way or the other and am willing to be persuaded, hence not posting on it, but your last umpteen posts haven't dealt with any of the counter arguments but just consist of insults about the intelligence of people who are clearly quite bright.
They are thick. And I completely right, and they are completely wrong.
If you can't see that: then you are thick too.
Brilliant.
I don't know who is right or wrong, but so far 'they' are putting arguments forward and you are replying with insults or arguments along the lines of:
'They are thick. And I completely right, and they are completely wrong. If you can't see that: then you are thick too'
Not sure that one convinces me entirely, maybe because I am thick, but you aren't convincing this fence sitter who would like a bit more substance.
For what it is worth my stance is: I think what Costa have done is a bit weird, but it doesn't get me angry and if people hadn't made a fuss of it I would never have known, but now I do I would love to know what their thinking was behind this promotion.
"When Ritchie Herron woke after gender reassignment surgery, he had a feeling he had made a terrible mistake.
Five years later, his scars still sometimes weep and he cannot walk long distances or ride a bike. “I’ve awakened from what was a mental health crisis, to a body that will be for ever changed and damaged,” he said. He no longer identifies as transgender and is living as a gay man “as best I can, given what has happened”."
to Oooh I fancy a decaf cappuccino with sprinkles.
Which just shows that careful psychological assessment should be an essential precursor to life altering treatments.
It's the trivialisation that grates. Fitting a colostomy bag is a life-saving surgery with, at a guess, many fewer patients subsequently regretting the procedure, so why not have a cartoon of one of those?
Regret rate for gender affirming care is between 1% - 5%
Do you think it’s going to stay there given
1) the woeful lack of follow up, now being corrected,
2) the substantial increase in the number of surgeries performed and
3) the significant expansion of treatment beyond the cohort that the Dutch study used - the basis for all this “care”?
Do you agree with Dr Helen Webberley that gender dysphoria is a mental health issue that, virtually uniquely among mental illnesses can be treated by surgery?
"Some studies suggest that rates of regret have declined over the years as patient selection and treatment methods have improved. In a review of 27 studies involving almost 8,000 teens and adults who had transgender surgeries, mostly in Europe, the U.S and Canada, 1% on average expressed regret. For some, regret was temporary, but a small number went on to have detransitioning or reversal surgeries, the 2021 review said."
Do you have a citation suggesting otherwise?
I doubt it. The anti-trans brigade only ever seem to trot out the same small number of detransioners whenever this topic is brought up. If trans-related surgeries were as full of regret as they claim where are all the others? They can’t all be cowering in fear of those terrible trans activists we keep being warned about.
All this anti-surgery campaigning infantilises those who choose that path. Bodily autonomy matters: people get to choose what they do with & to their own bodies. They also get to own the consequences. So long as they get appropriate counselling to enable them to make informed consent, who are we to prevent them from making changes to their own bodies?
You must be so proud of what has happened to Ritchie herron
When Ritchie Herron woke after gender reassignment surgery, he had a feeling he had made a terrible mistake.
Five years later, his scars still sometimes weep and he cannot walk long distances or ride a bike.
...
“Today, despite multiple follow-up surgeries, my scar lines still weep, occasionally becoming inflamed and causing crippling pain. In the flesh cavity that was created to mimic a vagina, I feel mostly nothing, aside from the occasional stabs of pain. I can’t use the toilet properly . . . and no matter how hard I push or strain, a dribble emerges, which may continue for hours after I have left the seat.”
Omelettes and eggs, hey? And what is truly depressing about you is that you think minding that this happened makes me part of an "anti-trans brigade."
and a million other sources you can find for yourself and are pretending you can't.
Do you regard these people merely as collateral damage or as active and malignant traitors?
You can indeed find a small number of people who regret transitioning. Well done - you just made my point for me, again: That’s exactly what I said.
Meanwhile the available evidence is that the overwhelming majority of those who go through surgery after appropriate counselling have no regrets: If that changes, then I might shift my views, but the ground truth that bodily autonomy matters will still remain.
I had an operation on my shoulder. It turned out to be the wrong operation for me and I required a second operation 4 years later. I regret having that 1st operation and should have had that 2nd operation earlier.
I think the appropriate response to this is better training for orthopaedic surgeons and ensuring the NHS has shoulder specialists in every hospital, plus more research into long term outcomes. I don't think the 1st operation needs to be banned.
Good news about dropping the UKCA stupidity. If nothing else it was woefully inaccurate - when it comes to standards and customs there is no UK...
Of course it hasn't been "dropped". That would be a "betrayal of Brexit"
It has just not been implemented.
Indefinitely...
In what sector is this? I've already got products at work through new UKCA process, and it was already different to the CE mark process. There is also regulatory divergence starting to occur, with some of the more stupid CE requirements having been toned down.
On topic, Boycott Costa. They've picked a side and need to be punished for it.
That's the only way Woke Capitalism and these Culture Wars end.
I won't be buying anything there for the foreseeable.
CR: Oh no, not the trans topic again *eye roll emoji*
Also CR: Boycott Costa for showing a trans person in an advert.
What is "Woke Capitalism"? What are the "Culture Wars"? Do you also believe in "Cultural Marxism" or the like?
Can Capitalism really ever truly be woke? Back in the early 00s Disney was very squeamish about 'gay stuff', seemed to recoil away from anything that might hint at the whiff of same-sex relationships. Because they calculated they would turn more people off, which would hit their bottom line.
Now things have changed, and there is more to gain by embracing LGB than being silent. The T is just a bit behind that. If companies are right, then by embracing Trans issues, they'll make some more money than they otherwise might have. If they're wrong, they'll lose money and their businesses can be replaced by their competitors.
Companies aren't being "woke" (not that I know what some people mean by that) - they either market things they think will appeal to people with dispensable income, or they do things to cover their arses from lawsuits. They don't care about inclusion or diversity or whatever; they care about profit.
Yes, one can save a lot of time by recognising that (obviously there will be exceptions, as for every generalisation) If one doesn't like a system, work to change it, don't mess about targeting individual companies operating within it. There are three ways to effect change in a democratic market economy:
1. Pass a law making it mandatory 2. Change regulations to make it profitable for companies to do what you want 3. Encourage consumer behaviour to achieve the same effect.
In my less contentious sphere, we try to persuade Government (1) to mandate an end to live exports, (2) to provide subsidies to farmers transitioning from factory farming to less unpleasant systems and (3) introduce labelling of higher-welfare meat so consumers can vote with their wallets (as they did for eggs) and farmers can increase sales by responding to (2). What we don't do, by and large, is appeal to companies' better natures or condemn anyone for making a profit. We just assume they're open to good welfare but primarily want to be successful. In a funny sort of way, free market enthusiasts and Marxists agree - it's not about the individual businesses, but about how the system is set up.
Similarly, if younger consumers in particular have developed different values, don't blame Costa for responding to them. It's what companies do. If you think the younger consumers are morally wrong, launch a campaign to persuade them otherwise.
Trans people are people. They do not deserve to be buried in the shadows at society's edge. It is still within living memory that if you were gay you could go to prison, if you were black you were second class and if you were female you were little better than chattel.
And the "conservative" elements of society opposed the liberation of every one of those groups.
Another idiot speaks.
Indeed you do, but I forgive you. Your spasmodic utterances of moral outrage are like a pleasant old curtain dressing the windows of PB. It adds to the atmosphere of the place and is definitely more colourful than the recent bletherings about cricket.
The blast from the past here is you, actually. Let me guess: in your head you are reliving CND/gay rights/Apartheid sit ins from your early 70s heyday? I'd like to say it was funny and harmless, but consider this: the Mermaids CEO had her son castrated at the age of 16 because her husband was homophobic and the child was gay. She thought he's be OK with a girl. Was "emasculate gays" actually what you were arguing for back in the JCR?
Nothing could be further from the truth.
In the 70s I was as brainwashed as everyone else. I had no time for CND or gays etc.
As I travelled through life I met people who I had been brought up to believe were mad, bad or wrong and learned that they were just people like everyone else.
It is hard to shake off what was inculcated into you in childhood and some people never do.
As for your provocative statements about the Mermaids CEO, I know nothing about her or the charity but if it happened as you state then I have no doubt that some legal recourse will ensue. OTOH if you are just sh*t-stirring then what you have said looks very close to being libellous.
That's been pretty much my journey. I'm at the point in my life where I don't care how people live their lives, as long as it's legal and consented to. Women have fought long and hard to try and get parity with men, and we've got to somehow balance that with trans rights. I must admit that I'm somewhat overwhelmed by certain aspects of the trans culture (menstruation and breast feeding mostly) but try and keep an open mind.
Comments
Hot can be interpreted however one wishes.
Have you not being paying attention to how your lot have had your arse handed to you on a plate over the last year?
It has destroyed the SNP, Tavistock is neutered and even the Labour Party has changed it's position.
YOU LOST.
Edit: belay that - I'm thinking of Doune not Dollar (imperfect memories of reading the Historic Scotland members mag).
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doune_Castle
The latter is really built to intimidate potential dissenters.
When Ritchie Herron woke after gender reassignment surgery, he had a feeling he had made a terrible mistake.
Five years later, his scars still sometimes weep and he cannot walk long distances or ride a bike.
...
“Today, despite multiple follow-up surgeries, my scar lines still weep, occasionally becoming inflamed and causing crippling pain. In the flesh cavity that was created to mimic a vagina, I feel mostly nothing, aside from the occasional stabs of pain. I can’t use the toilet properly . . . and no matter how hard I push or strain, a dribble emerges, which may continue for hours after I have left the seat.”
Omelettes and eggs, hey? And what is truly depressing about you is that you think minding that this happened makes me part of an "anti-trans brigade."
Also
https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2017/feb/03/experience-i-regret-transitioning
https://www.nytimes.com/2023/05/16/us/politics/transgender-care-detransitioners.html
https://nypost.com/2022/06/18/detransitioned-teens-explain-why-they-regret-changing-genders/
and a million other sources you can find for yourself and are pretending you can't.
Do you regard these people merely as collateral damage or as active and malignant traitors?
If you can't see that: then you are thick too.
have had lots of sex in that castleproposed in that castle.Would heartily recommend the King James suite.
The ad is virtue signalling.
But also,
If folks want to get top surgery, let them.
Casino Royale is an angry nutter.
Getting pissy about woke, heat pumps and LTNs is going to bore everyone shitless.
Thanks for listening to my Ted Talk.
In the 70s I was as brainwashed as everyone else. I had no time for CND or gays etc.
As I travelled through life I met people who I had been brought up to believe were mad, bad or wrong and learned that they were just people like everyone else.
It is hard to shake off what was inculcated into you in childhood and some people never do.
As for your provocative statements about the Mermaids CEO, I know nothing about her or the charity but if it happened as you state then I have no doubt that some legal recourse will ensue. OTOH if you are just sh*t-stirring then what you have said looks very close to being libellous.
They are thick. And I completely right, and they are completely wrong.
If you can't see that: then you are thick too.
A lesson to us all.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Teddy_Boy#/media/File:Teddy_Boys_on_Southend_High_Street_1977.jpg
Meanwhile the available evidence is that the overwhelming majority of those who go through surgery after appropriate counselling have no regrets: If that changes, then I might shift my views, but the ground truth that bodily autonomy matters will still remain.
Defence procurement - just the model I'd choose.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/live/2023/aug/01/rishi-sunak-nuclear-north-sea-oil-uk-politics-live
A taskforce has been launched to ensure the UK has the right skills in the nuclear industry as part of government plans to drastically scale up nuclear capacity.
The panel will work to ensure roles are filled in the rapidly expanding defence and civil nuclear sectors, the Ministry of Defence said.
It will develop a national skills strategy for jobs across the industry, from technical scientific and engineering roles to logistics, project management, commercial and finance, PA Media reports.
The taskforce will be chaired by Sir Simon Bollom, the former chief executive of Defence Equipment and Support, and include government officials, academics and industry partners.
The defence procurement minister, James Cartlidge, said:
By developing nuclear skills, we are not just investing in the UK economy but our national security.
The creation of this new taskforce will challenge the whole of the UK’s nuclear sector to be ambitious in addressing the nuclear skills gap, and we are delighted to appoint Sir Simon Bollom to drive this work forward.
Bollom said:
The nuclear sector is vital to our nation, and I am proud to have been given the opportunity to lead such an important taskforce to ensure that we have the people and skills we need to deliver our programmes.
The nuclear minister, Andrew Bowie, hailed a nuclear “revival” with the launch of Great British Nuclear, an arm’s-length body involved in the government-backed competition to develop smaller-scale nuclear technology projects.
This letter shows the problems inherent in systematic reviews and meta-analyses. A systematic review (systemic review, systematic analysis, whatevs) is a summary of studies. A meta-analysis takes the results from two or more studies and combines them to reach a conclusion based on the (putatively) bigger sample size. So a systemic review of bands would take all the rock bands and say the Beatles were the best. A meta-analysis would take the top ten bands and produce an eleventh with Jagger on vocals and Lennon on the lyrics.
Systematic analyses are formalised summary methods, but they are difficult to do right as there is a lot of bureaucracy involved, eg resolving which studies are to be included. Your full formal Cochrane review is not always done, and they can be a bit underdone.
Meta-analyses work on the basis that you can combine studies, which raises the question as to whether the studies are actually combinable. Checking that they are is a step in a proper meta-analysis, but again this is not always done
As for the letter, stating that "this study should have been included/excluded" is a cold read: you can say that about any of them. I agree with the responders about how more recent data may give different results, although their point about generalising to "TGNB" (Transgender and gender non-binary) I think is more about too-enthusiastic use of politically correct terminology.
In short:
You both need to be aware that quoting stuff you found on the Internet is not as conclusive as you might think.
Most medicine contains a degree of risk - and everyone is made aware of that before hand. They have to - it is the law. If any of these doctors or the NHS did not follow that law, then fine, sue em. But I doubt they didn't, because you have to do it with all other healthcare as well.
The Americans have started building their SMR factory already.
Just got no time for idiots and bullshit.
The interim Cass review found studies conducted so far were of “low” or “very low” quality. I have seen nothing that suggests that view is wrong.
The U.K. systematic reviews found the available research to be of “very low” quality — meaning that there is very low certainty that an observed effect, like reduced suicidality, is due to the intervention, and therefore the studies’ claimed results are unlikely to represent the truth.
https://thehill.com/opinion/healthcare/4070174-why-europe-and-america-are-going-in-opposite-directions-on-youth-transgender-medicine/amp/
The common thread here is your susceptibility and weakness of character to brainwashing. It's why I was embarrassed by your BOO posts before the Brexit referendum, despite being on the same side, and have such contempt for your Bregret posts now.
I respect those who think for themselves and have the integrity and intelligence to progressively engage with an argument, and not endlessly repeat shibbotleths regardless of where it goes.
Learn from it. Your life will be better.
I think people who benefit from sex change surgery should have it, people who will not benefit should not, and we should make every effort to distinguish between the two. You think Yay! Trans! New, groovy, with it and down with da kidz. Budweiser! Costa! Death to those who oppose some instances of it, and let's pretend that opposing some instances of it is just a cover for opposing it in general. Because my target audience is easily stupid enough to believe that.
Any SMR site is going to be litigated and protested to death anyway. It's all a complete waste of time and money.
I don't know who is right or wrong, but so far 'they' are putting arguments forward and you are replying with insults or arguments along the lines of:
'They are thick. And I completely right, and they are completely wrong. If you can't see that: then you are thick too'
Not sure that one convinces me entirely, maybe because I am thick, but you aren't convincing this fence sitter who would like a bit more substance.
For what it is worth my stance is: I think what Costa have done is a bit weird, but it doesn't get me angry and if people hadn't made a fuss of it I would never have known, but now I do I would love to know what their thinking was behind this promotion.
I think the appropriate response to this is better training for orthopaedic surgeons and ensuring the NHS has shoulder specialists in every hospital, plus more research into long term outcomes. I don't think the 1st operation needs to be banned.
There is also regulatory divergence starting to occur, with some of the more stupid CE requirements having been toned down.
Women have fought long and hard to try and get parity with men, and we've got to somehow balance that with trans rights. I must admit that I'm somewhat overwhelmed by certain aspects of the trans culture (menstruation and breast feeding mostly) but try and keep an open mind.