What the signs really say
Translating for the determinedly dim
A few incurious, reckless dolts have chosen to pose with signs saying they support a ‘trans-inclusive’ ban on conversion therapy.
It's rare that I lose my temper these days, but pictures like this, all over Twitter, have made me very angry. Do these politicians actually understand the issues here? The implications for gay and lesbian children who might think they're 'in the wrong body' are horrendous.
Here’s what the signs really say.
Good for Anneliese Dodds for bravely standing against the crowd!
(Only joking. She went along with it just like everyone else.)
Thanks to Dennis Kavanagh for his contributions!
Some more suggestions:
"Doing whatever Stonewall wants is easier than listening to gays and women"
"Gay/Autistic youths don't deserve evidence based healthcare"
"Biology denial depends on a steady supply of youths confused at school"
"Experimental mass-medicalisation of gay/autistic kids is fine by me"
Or some factual ones:
"Puberty blockers cause crippling bone density deficits and lead to kids in pain"
"Homophobia is a safeguarding concern at the Gender Clinics (See Appleby v Tavistock)"
"No one can explain the 5000% rise in girls presenting at the Tavistock between 2009-19 and I don't care why"
"Statistically, children to take puberty blockers end up on hormones. It's not a pause, it locks them into lifelong medicalisation"
"Adults who would never consider surgery require confused gay/autistic children to do so as an emotional prop in their campaign to erode female boundaries"
Why are the signs in pink? Is it to make the message seem cuddly and fluffy?