BananaSpike

We agree with each other? He's either a man or intersex. He shouldn't be competing in women's sports.

All those things can also be bad. Do you agree that this is bad, though?

If in your mind the claim about a surge in suicides is sufficiently refuted,

Is it sufficiently refuted in your mind?

I'm not sure why the hostility? I've read the source, and you either didn't read it or misunderstood it. Nowhere does it say what you're claiming it says, you're welcome to disprove that with quotes.

For anybody else reading this, if you doubt that the above commenter misunderstood the article, you can just read it. It's not very long.

The entire premise in the article of denying any kind of gender-affirming treatment is what I was responding to

What? Can you quote any part of the article that tries to deny "any kind of gender-affirming treatment"? Here is the central claim that they're refuting:

The central claim, made on X (formerly known as Twitter), is that there has been a large rise in suicide by current and recent patients of the Gender Identity Development Service (GIDS) service at the Tavistock since an earlier restriction of puberty-blocking drugs that followed a High Court decision in a case (Bell v Tavistock) in December 2020. The rise is described as a “surge” in suicides and “an explosion”, indicating a substantial and, by implication, unequivocal increase. There are multiple references to children dying in future because they are unable to access puberty-blocking drugs.

Just refer to people the way they want to be referred to and respect their wishes. Isn’t that what we all want?

Can you quote any part of the article that conflicts with this statement?

That's not at odds with the article. The article refutes a claim that there was a surge in suicides due to inability to access puberty blockers. It doesn't touch on broader subjects like being called what you'd like.

Where does it say that suicides are "no big deal"? The central claim that it's refuting is this:

The central claim, made on X (formerly known as Twitter), is that there has been a large rise in suicide by current and recent patients of the Gender Identity Development Service (GIDS) service at the Tavistock since an earlier restriction of puberty-blocking drugs that followed a High Court decision in a case (Bell v Tavistock) in December 2020

The article says suicides are tragedies, but also refutes the claim about a surge in suicides.

This is the sort of useful conversation I was looking to have. I think we're in agreement. In another comment, I wrote this:

WPATH should clean house and purge all pedophiles, retract SOC 8, publish an apology, and write a new version that doesn’t have input from known pedophiles.

Which might not be how you would phrase it, but largely agrees with:

If that’s the case then I think most sane people would agree they should not consult with them anymore, and revisit any influence they might have had on policy.