Mumsnet is in financial trouble. According to their CEO its "squeaky bum time".
With less money floating about, advertisers are carrying out more due diligence, I expect those businesses which support anti-LGBT sentiment are more at risk. Mumsnet transphobia was bad business.
Flora used to bear a #mumsnet logo. They severed the relationship following a reasonable question from a mum of a trans teen who didn't want to buy a product associated with a hate forum. #boycottTransphobia#mumsnettransphobia
Their CEO has regular fawning articles in the UK press (mainly the Telegraph, one of the most anti trans papers), including sponsored content & authored puff pieces. This doesn't seem to have helped much...
Web traffic to the site has nearly halved in the last 9 months. While their CEO is blaming coronavirus, the rot set in long ago. Little changed since its launch in 2000 the site looks increasingly anachronistic, a relic, surviving as an internet meme.
I expect Justine hasn't kicked off those users spouting transphobic vitriol not because of a commitment to free speech (indeed they've been quick to comply with those slandered threatening legal action) but because they can't afford to lose some of their most active users
I'll end with the below, most forlorn, entry. A survey put out on twitter by @MumsnetTowers just a few weeks ago on the subject of coronoavirus and pregnancy. The account with 153,000 followers attracted a single like, just one retweet- the loan sharer their CEO, Justine Roberts.
Addendum. Mumsnet made £2.245 million profit after tax in 2017 & £2.221 in 2018 (companies house). According to the CEO "last year we made a profit of 570k. This year so far we are loss making". They've taken & extended a loan, staff on reduced hours & a pay holiday for the CEO.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
Trans people have been using hormones for healthcare for around 100 years. There is 100 years of experience of Trans people helping each other source medication & use it as safely as possible working with health providers where possible in a 'least harm' approach. 1/
Under the current UK Government & NHS there is no access to adolescent healthcare. I believe there is a moral duty to help Trans youth who are accessing medication to do so as easily & as safely as possible. To highlight & mitigate the risks, & provide trusted information 2/
Further,, to enable Trans adolescents who may want access to Trans healthcare, to do so in line with International best practice & long established harm reduction guidelines. I will work with anyone with these aims & can provide resources, knowledge, platform & networks 3/
The question whether the Cass review team carried out engagement with Trans communities is immaterial. The engagement was not genuine, views shared in good faith by children & young people, families & support services were absent from synthesis & final recommendations. #CassFlaws
The methodology of the Cass Review qualitiative research stated they would conduct 40 interviews, 20 with 12-18s and 20 with adults up to age 30. They managed only 14 and 12 respectively. 26 interviews which were jumped on by gender critcal parents & anti Trans 'ex trans' groups
I'll repeat, in terms of the research output, the Cass York team conducted only 14 interviews with Trans children. 14 not even meeting the miniscule target set out in their research methodology.
I'm working my way through the Cass Sytemic review on Clinical guidelines for children & adolescents experiencing gender dysphoria or incongruence: it is very difficult to lack of access to the standards they review. There are also methodological issues 1/adc.bmj.com/content/early/…
I'm going to talk about the two standards the Cass research team rated highest & which the Cass Final report is most closely matched to in terms of recommendations - namely The Swedish and Finland protocols 2/
It's important to note neither of these guidelines is published in English. Originally Cass research team had stated they would exclude non English language guidelines, this is repeated in the overarching criteria of the Cass Report (screenshot 1). However they made exceptions 3/
I've been looking at a paper cited in Cass (recreating a graph introducing new spelling errors). I have thoughts. It is an undergraduate author. No full is data provided - only 3 sets of extracts, which have 9 or 10 respondents 1 of which repeats in error. tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.10…
The methodology section doesn't state the survey was originally a questionnaire to understand current needs of detransitioners and to produce an information booklet about detransition. I wonder if ethics approval was given for this - any German Trans academics can help check?
The survey was shared on Twitter, Reddit (R/Detrans), Facebook & Instagram. I've looked at these posts. There was minimal interaction which makes me suspicious of the claimed 237 respondents - much higher than more publicised surveys ie Littman (2021) 101 responents in 4.5 months
I've been reading of the Finland youth gender centre in Tampere which the Cass review lauds. It was recently revealed the head of the centre is on the Cass advisory group. CW In following tweets I relate extremely disturbing accounts from parents & youth of what they endured 1/
This is by 'Spinner' for Kehraaja (Nightjar in Finnish) 19.3.2021 "Describe to me how you masturbate?" - the position of trans youth in the treatment system is bleak" 2/kehraaja.com/kuvaile-minull…
Content Warning in the article is as follows "we recommend using discretion when reading, as the text may shock readers. The text discusses, among other things, medical power and its use, possible violations of a child's sexual integrity, and measures aimed at trans youth." 3/
There is a bad science story in Today's Daily Mail. Where an anti Trans academic has published a new study - the headline claiming Puberty Blockers lowers IQ in Trans youth. It took me 5 mins to find the study.
Here's some quick fact checking on this research: 1/
1) The study 'The Impact of Suppressing Puberty on Neuropsychological Function' Baxindale S. is pre-print & has not been peer reviewed. It is not clear where or when it will be published. A quick review sees some common factors in anti Trans studies such as 'cherry picking' 2/
2) The 'Study' presents no new data, it is a literature review, front ended with common anti Trans talking points. Many of these look familiar to simliar outputs from the author including on anti Trans lobby group Transgender Trend's website. 3/