Hi all. I love Erin Reed and her substack Erin In the morning. I don’t subscribe to many but I do hers. Here is something for all those that say European countries are reversing on gender affirming care or cite the horrible bias of the debunked Cass review. Hugs.
—————————————————————————————————————
The recommendations, released by the Association of the Scientific Medical Societies in Germany, come at a time when US politicians erroneously claim that Europe is “pulling back” on transgender care.
Erin In The Morning is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a subscriber.
Upgrade to paid
In recent years, U.S. politicians have selectively framed European healthcare policies to justify restrictions on transgender care, seizing on a handful of conservative policies to claim that “Europe is pulling back.” The most extreme example, the United Kingdom’s Cass Review, has been wielded to justify a near-total ban on puberty blockers and even cited in U.S. Supreme Court arguments. But new medical guidelines from Germany, Austria, and Switzerland tell a different story. These countries have reaffirmed the importance of gender-affirming care for transgender youth and issued sharp critiques of the Cass Review, calling out its severe methodological flaws and misrepresentations.
The guidelines, released Friday in German, span more than 400 pages and represent the collective expertise of 26 medical and psychotherapeutic professional organizations, along with two self-representation organizations from Germany, Austria, and Switzerland. Their stated goal is “to provide guidance to all professionals in the healthcare system who deal with young transgender and non-binary people for the best possible professionally informed care based on the current state of medical knowledge.”
Transgender medical guidelines and associated medical organizations recommending them.
From the outset, the guidelines explain the importance of gender affirming care, stating that there are “no proven effective treatment alternative without body-modifying medical measures for a [person with] permanently persistent gender incongruence.”
Importantly, the guidelines were developed with those who are experts in the fields of gender affirming care having a voice at the table, unlike the Cass Review: “Current guidelines, which are published by medical societies, were predominantly developed by clinical experts for the field of application and are based on an integrated synthesis of the assessment of available evidence and the broadest possible expert consensus.”
The guidelines directly recommend puberty blockers and individualized, prioritized care for transgender youth undergoing physical changes.In the section on puberty blockers, the guidelines state with a strong recommendation: “If, in individual cases, the progressive pubertal maturation development creates a time pressure in which health damage would be expected due to longer waiting times to avert irreversible bodily changes (e.g. male voice change), access to child and adolescent psychiatric or psychotherapeutic clarification and medical treatment optionsshould be granted as quickly as possible.”
The guidelines also deliver a strong critique of the Cass Review, the report currently being used to justify bans on gender-affirming care in the United Kingdom and leveraged in other countries to further restrictions. German medical societies deem the Cass Review largely inapplicable to their own guidelines due to its numerous methodological shortcomings. One of their sharpest criticisms focuses on the lack of transparency regarding those who advised and produced the review, as well as the limited expertise of those involved.
“Medical professional societies were not recognizably involved in the preparation of the report. A so-called “Assurance Group” was appointed, but it was explicitly not involved in the development of recommendations for the Cass Review. There are reports that an “Advisory Board” was also established. The composition and specific contribution of this “Advisory Board” are not documented (Ruuska et al., 2024; Cass, 2024),” read the guidelines.
They also criticize the Cass Review and NHS’s recommendation of “psychotherapy” for gender dysphoria as without evidence and as potentially harmful: “Psychotherapy is recommended for co-incident disorders, for which there is already an indication due to the co-incident disorder itself. However, it is also recommended or the ‘management of [GD] associated distress.’ None of the studies included in the review in question were able to show a reduction in gender dysphoria through psychotherapy.”
The new German, Austrian, and Swiss guidelines mark a significant advancement for transgender healthcare in those countries, reinforcing a growing trend in Europe toward expanding, not restricting, access to gender-affirming care.They join the ranks of nations like Spain and France, which have taken more progressive stances on transgender rights, including medical care. More importantly, they dismantle the false narrative that Europe is “pulling back” on transgender care.In reality, it is the United States that stands as an outlier, with its regressive policies placing it far to the right of much of the Western world.
Erin In The Morning is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a subscriber.
Story March 07, 2025 (Watch and/or listen on the page, linked just above.)
Republicans in Congress are pushing forward budget plans that would cut trillions in federal spending and give trillions more in tax cuts that disproportionately benefit corporations and the ultra-rich. This week, hundreds of faith leaders gathered on the Christian holy day of Ash Wednesday on Capitol Hill to voice their opposition. “There’s no way you can do the kinds of cuts they’re talking about — it’s mathematically impossible — without touching Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid,” says Bishop William Barber, one of the participants. Barber also reflects on the 60th anniversary of Bloody Sunday, when civil rights marchers were brutalized in Selma, Alabama, and stresses that economic justice was always at the heart of the movement alongside ending segregation and winning voting rights.
Transcript
This is a rush transcript. Copy may not be in its final form.
AMY GOODMAN: This is Democracy Now!, democracynow.org, The War and Peace Report. I’m Amy Goodman.
House Republicans narrowly adopted a budget proposal last week to cut as much as $2 trillion in spending over a 10-year period, in part to fund Trump’s tax cuts. A new analysis by the Congressional Budget Office shows the proposed budget would require massive cuts to Medicaid spending. Meanwhile, Elon Musk, the richest man in the world, has warned the U.S. government will go bankrupt without his Department of Government Efficiency, DOGE, which is working to slash a trillion dollars from the deficit.
This week, hundreds of faith leaders gathered to mark the Christian holy day of Ash Wednesday on Capitol Hill and to protest the impact the proposed cuts could have on the poor and the vulnerable. This is Bishop William Barber speaking at the protest Wednesday.
BISHOP WILLIAM BARBER II: If an unelected technocrat can delete the financial commitments of a government established for the people and by the people, and we don’t say anything, we betray our moral commitments to liberty.
AMY GOODMAN: Faith leaders also shared findings of a new report Wednesday called “The High Moral Stake: Our Budget, Our Future,” which details how President Trump and the Republican Party are taking more essential services and money away from working people while cutting taxes for the wealthiest. It was authored by Institute for Policy Studies, the Economic Policy Institute and Repairers of the Breach.
For more, we’re joined from North Carolina by Bishop William Barber, president and senior lecturer at Repairers of the Breach, national co-chair of the Poor People’s Campaign, founding director of the Center for Public Theology and Public Policy at Yale Divinity School. He’s co-author of the new book White Poverty: How Exposing Myths About Race and Class Can Reconstruct American Democracy.
Bishop Barber, welcome back to Democracy Now! on this 60th anniversary of Bloody Sunday, when voting rights activists marched — tried to march over the Edmund Pettus Bridge, led by John Lewis, and were beaten down by Alabama state troopers. Five months later, the Voting Rights Act would be signed by President Johnson. Your thoughts on putting history and this moment together, and what you were demanding on Wednesday?
BISHOP WILLIAM BARBER II: Well, thank you so much, Amy.
As I was listening to that song, “We Shall Overcome,” there’s another line that says, “We are not afraid.” And I want to thank Representative Green for his courage and showing the way of courage. He’s a dear friend of mine. He’s exactly right: You cannot wait until a dictator is in charge. You must challenge the way toward that dictatorship.
And we must remember, on this day 60 years ago, we did see that Bloody Sunday, but for nearly 40 years, Amelia Boynton, who was also beaten that day, a woman that John Lewis held in his arms, they have been working against voter suppression in that particular city. They also connected the issues of voter suppression and voter denial to economic injustice. Remember, the voting piece was supposed to be a part of the Civil Rights Act of ’64 along with raising the minimum wage to a living wage, and those things were gutted out of the ’64 Civil Rights Act, which made the ’65 march and the ’65 Voting Rights Act necessary.
At the end of that march, when they finally did reach Montgomery, Dr. King gave an amazing sermon. And he chose not to just talk about voting rights, but he chose to connect voting rights to economic injustice. And in that sermon, he said that the greatest fear of the greedy oligarchs in this country was for the masses of Black people and poor white people to join together and form a voting bloc that could fundamentally shift the economic architecture of the nation, and that every time this possibility becomes possible, the forces of extremism and the forces of division sow that division to keep it from happening.
I think we see that here today, what’s going on with this Congress. And it’s amazing to me, for instance, that they would censure Representative Green. They didn’t censure our sister out of Georgia. They didn’t censure the man who called Obama a liar on the floor. It’s a strange time that — the cheering, the applauding. But I think we are in a crisis of civilization, really, not just a crisis of democracy. It’s going to call people to have to stand, regardless of where they are.
So, what we’re dealing with right now, Amy, before I even talk about the specific policy, is this immoral philosophy that’s at work. Number one, they are operating off of the deliberate attempt to use executive orders as a way of intentionally violating the Constitution, thereby creating enough confusion to distract people from what’s going on in the Congress, because what happens in the Congress has the weight of the law, and EO doesn’t have the weight of law.
Number two, we are seeing the tyranny of technology and the dehumanization of people.
Number three, we’re seeing the attempt to make people justify their existence, which has its roots in racism, apartheid and Nazism.
Number four, we’re seeing the denial of equality on every front.
Five, we’re seeing the outright violation of freedom of speech, due to the process — due process and equal protection under the law for all persons, and an attempt to end birthright citizenship.
Number six, we are seeing the outright betrayal of liberty.
Number seven, we are seeing the idolatry of the certainty of white supremacy, that some people can decide who’s in, who’s out, who’s right, who’s wrong.
And number eight, we’re seeing the misuse of religious Christian nationalism in an attempt to falsely claim that their immoral actions are moral.
This is what is underneath, if you will, what we see going on. It is dangerous. It leads us to dictatorships and worse. And we must be courageous in this moment. I think that what you saw happen with Representative Green is just the tip of the kind of pushback we’re going to see as the weather gets warmer and as people see more and more the kind of damage that’s being suggested by this current budget and this current Congress. (snip-MORE; watch/listen on the page)
As anyone who follows me on this blog might or should know I love the content Ethel produces. I followed this young woman from when they were a teen struggling with their sexuality and their finally blossoming out and accepting herself as they are. How she feels inside themselves, and how they deal with that in the world around them. It is a hard struggle. I know I had to do it as a gay teen constantly surrounded and barraged by anti-gay propaganda, and that is what Ethel went through as a trans girl. It was complicated by her being autistic, which there is nothing wrong with being autistic, but it did mean a lot of people did not understand her and were unable to appreciate how detailed she can be. I know it is hard for her to cover these haters talking about abusers as she was abused as a child. However she stands up and gives grand videos supporting trans people and she includes her own strengths to the issue. Hugs
There is no meaningful difference between the claims made by gender ‘critical’ fascists when targeting trans people and those made by the Nazis of Nazi Germany. Said monster has been empowered by the press for too long and now threatens us all.
Hi, welcome to Essence of Thought with me, Ethel Thurston, as your host.
March 9, 1839 The U.S. Supreme Court, with only one dissent, freed the slaves who had seized the Spanish slave ship Amistad, ruling that they had been illegally forced into slavery, and thus were free under American law. Slave ship They had mutinied and taken control of the ship off the shore of Cuba (then a colony of Spain) and demanded to be taken back to Africa but wound up in U.S. waters off the coast of Long Island, New York. More on the Amistad mutiny
March 9, 1945 Phyllis Daley became the first African-American commissioned nurse in the U.S. Navy. Though more than 500 black nurses served in the Army during World War II, the Navy had only dropped its color ban a few weeks before.
March 9, 1964 Five Sioux Indians, led by Richard McKenzie, claimed the island of Alcatraz in San Francisco Bay as Indian land. The island had recently been abandoned, and the action was based on an 1868 treaty which entitled Indians to take possession of surplus federal land. The native Americans advocated turning it into a cultural center and Indian university, but their occupation lasted only four hours.
March 9, 1965 Two days after Bloody Sunday [see March 7, 1965] Reverend Martin Luther King, Jr. led 1500 outraged people gathered from around the country back to the Edmund Pettus Bridge on the outskirts of Selma, Alabama. They were attempting for a second time to march to the state capital of Montgomery in support of voting rights for black Americans. Confronted once again by state troopers blocking passage to the bridge, King knelt in prayer, then led his followers back, avoiding further violence. Later that evening three white ministers were attacked by local whites as they left a soul food restaurant in Selma. Reverend James Reeb was struck on the head with a club and died two days later.
And no, she didn’t “earn her money in the divorce”; she built Amazon into what it is/was. She earned her money by working. It’s important to note because of opposition comments about her.
MacKenzie Scott Nice Time Update! by Rebecca Schoenkopf
Turns out that the way she gives money is a really good way.Read on Substack
And now let us check in with breath-of-fresh-air MacKenzie Scott, the heart-of-gold billionaire who spun her share of her divorce from Jeff Bezos after he cheated on her into philanthropy and Yield Giving, a foundation that has so far given out almost $20 billion in unrestricted gifts for social justice, human services (like abortions and health care), education, LGBTQ+ services, playgrounds, historically Black colleges and universities, a total of 2,450 excellent causes that happen to be the ones that piss off Elon Musk and other right-wing chuds the very most!
Turns out, according to a three-year-analysis by the Center for Effective Philanthropy of 800 of the donations her foundation has made, the no-strings-attached way she gives out money is quite effective!
When Scott started handing out unrestricted gifts in 2019, the world of philanthropy got shook. The usual way to go about doling out large sums of cash with a foundation is to give restricted gifts, like for eradicating the rockin’ pneumonia, but not the boogie-woogie flu, or a scholarship fund for sensitive boys with at least a 3.0 who play the flute, or constructing the Phineas Q. Oilman Center for Fracking Studies.
Donors like to direct exactly where their money goes. And they like to have their names on stuff, like etched on a plaque, or a “thank you” in the opera program. Also naming rights are a way to encourage ongoing involvement. Don’t you think dear departed Grandpa Oilman would have wanted his heirs to make sure that his building has plenty of money in trust to keep the center’s roof repaired?
And foundations usually give out grants in response to proposals. This usually starts with announcing the grant: The Betsy VonThundersnatch Foundation For The Arts intends to award $5 million to bring drag brunches to underserved populations. Then nonprofits that work in that area respond with a proposal that assesses the need, lays out project with objectives, includes a step-by-step timetable, detailed budget estimate for renting a van, buying wigs and champagne etc., a pitch of why their organization is the most capable one to meet the need, what the benchmarks for measuring success will be, and so on.
Then after a grantee gets the money, they’re usually required to regularly report back the details of their benchmark-hitting to a board. What some might call micromanaging and others might call responsible stewardship helps foundations and charities solicit gifts, because donors want to know exactly where their money is going and be reassured that it’s not going to get blown fast. Which makes sense! But all of that takes time, and wig money. It can be many months and sometimes even years between when a grant is announced and an awardee can cash a check, and charities have to pay overhead for people to look for grants to apply to, and write the proposals.
But MacKenzie Scott’s Yield Foundation does the opposite of this! They skip the solicitation-and-proposal part entirely, quietly and secretly researching organizations’ track records. And then the foundation cuts a surprise check, with no spending-timetable or strings attached, and lets the nonprofit roll with it. It is bold! It is brave! It is trusting!
And here’s the Center for Effective Philanthropy’s report on how it’s going: The grantees are actually not blowing all of the money. Most are using it to shore up longer-term stability and plan to spend it within two to five years. Some have been able to pay debt, and have reserves and health insurance for their employees for the first time, and they are able to provide more services and expand their missions.
Like the South Texas Food Bank. They were able to give their employees free health care, and also nearly doubled the amount of food they distributed to eight counties and one tribal nation in south Texas with the $9 million Scott’s foundation gave them. Also Kaboom! They build playgrounds, and with Scott’s $14 million they have quadrupled the size of their playgrounds, and have gotten into advocacy too, pushing for elimination of the use of toxic chemicals on playground surfaces.
Eighty-five percent of nonprofit recipients said that Scott’s gifts have helped them improve or expand their programming, and 52 percent reported a greater capacity to respond to the needs of the communities they serve. The organizations that received awards from Scott had double the amount of cash reserves as comparable nonprofits, which is vital for the long-term stability of any organization that depends on the kindness of strangers in a volatile economy.
Ninety-three percent reported that Scott’s grant moderately or significantly strengthened their ability to carry out their mission, and 90 percent said the gift bolstered their financial positions. More than 60 percent said they used the grant to establish credibility with other funders, though 53 percent were concerned that other funders might withdraw their support, believing that recipients didn’t need additional funding. But the other side to that is Scott’s foundation has already done the research, so her endorsement could also encourage more donations. How that will pan out in the end for charities remains to be seen.
And, though the grants don’t require them to, 70 percent of the recipients are tracking the impact of the money, some say even better than they actually were before, because now they have better capacity to do that. Said one, “This grant has allowed us to focus more deliberatively on our metrics and impact to better equip us to answer this question/tell our story/show our impact.”
And what an impact! Samples from the survey: 33,521 loans for a total of $1.26 billion to low-income households to buy homes, start or capitalize businesses, and address their financial needs. Health care for 100,000 new patients. Legal orientation for more than 12,000 refugees, and 200 unaccompanied immigrant minors re-unified with their families, and millions of meals served in the US and other countries.
And her freewheeling gifts are having an impact on other foundations also. More than half of foundation leaders surveyed said that they now thought that their foundations should consider giving out large, multiyear, unrestricted support, too. Which is not simple, because foundations are staffed, structured and budgeted to do things the way they’ve always done them, and it’s hard to get boards to agree on lunch, much less to a complete overhaul on how they do everything, and possibly to re-write of all of their bylaws. But now they have a fine example to follow, and success to point to.
That MacKenzie! She is so humble, it is hard to find pictures of her anywhere, unless they’re from her as Bezos’ plus-one in the old days. And while her ex is out here kissing Trump’s behind, whoring out the newspaper he bought and swanning around Aspen with his affair partner, she is making a difference in a good way. And still the 5th-richest woman in the world.
It’s all lovelier than a drag brunch in June.
OPEN THREAD. (We’ll have something up later too, you know what time.)
This writer, Crip Dyke, feels about Dems the way many here do; that they’re worthless doing anything except being polite. But when Dems do what they should, this writer publishes it so that people know. It’s what we should all do until someone with money forms a new party if that’s what people really want. (To me, it’d be easier to jump in and participate in the Dem party, and fix it from within. With numbers, it’d be easy and relatively quick to make the desired improvements. Anyway, here is good news about an issue on which we’ve all been writing and calling.)
Democrats Strike At Heart Of GOP Darkness, Kill Anti-Trans Sports Bill by Rebecca Schoenkopf
In the moment Death stepped on the Senate floor to claim S9, Tuberville reportedly whispered, ‘The horror. The horror.’Read on Substack
Let trans kids play. Image by Phil Roeder. Used under CCA 2.0.
In the 19 long, bitter decades since Trump issued Executive Order 14201, “Keeping Men Out Of Women’s Sports,” generations have been born, come of age, and died buried away from the sun, divided by uncrossable rivers. Few could conceive of the darkness of the soul in those times who have not lived them.
And so our forgotten years of hope reflecting off the waters of that most colonial of rivers, the Potomac, produced the most unexpected flicker yesterday: a filibuster victory in the Senate, blocking the codification of 14201 into law and ban trans participation in girls’ and women’s school sports. To quote Erin Reed:
Republicans called it the “Protection of Women and Girls in Sports Act.” Democrats dubbed it “The GOP Child Predator Empowerment Act”. The Senate clerk said it didn’t have the votes.
To misquote Joseph Conrad, the Democratic Party is a droll thing, a mysterious arrangement of spineless yes-men for a futile purpose. The most you can hope from it is some acknowledgement of yourself that comes too late, leaving a crop of inextinguishable regrets. But not March 3, 2025!
And not today, Satan!
The vote was not quite so positive as The Hill would have you believe: They reported that “all Democrats voted against” the bill, recorded as S. 9. While zero Democrats voted for it, two Dems known to waffle in the face of anti-trans attacks did abstain. The Senate’s two independents (both of whom caucus with Democrats), Angus King of Maine and Bernie Sanders of Vermont, both voted against. The final margin of 51-45 included two abstentions from Republicans as well, Shelley Capito (R-WV) and Cynthia Lummis (R-WY). Though Trump hasn’t ruled on the prior state of these Senators as blastocysts, both do appear to be women, curiously enough.
The defeat of S9 marks a rare moment in the 119th Congress in which Democrats hung together. On other votes including prominent Senate confirmations and measures in both the Senate and the House, there have been significant defections. HR 28, the House version of this bill, snagged two Democratic votes (both Texas centrists and both men). In a time when Democratic voters and other lefties have been crying out for principled obstructionism to be waged against Trump and the MAGA agenda, blocking S9 was a largely unexpected win. Calling out trans participation in girls’ and women’s sports has been a particularly effective form of attack by the GOP, even when lying their asses off, as Tommy Tuberville did on FOX:
“We’re getting to a point now where women and girls’ sports and getting ready to be extinct. Because already in states across this country, we have high school teams that are made up of totally boys participating against girls. […And wank, wank, wank.]”
Of course no one other than GOP primary voters have taken Tuberville seriously since his Auburn Tigers lost to 14 transsexual squirrels in Commodore drag. But if you need to hear it from someone who knows better than yr Wonkette, Kate Starbird, former NCAA basketball standout, former professional baller in the ABL and WNBA, and current University of Washington professor, had this to say about Tuberville’s demented lie:
“As a former athlete & current researcher of online rumors & disinfo, today’s atrocious example of the ‘right wing bullshit machine’ in action — anchored on a truly idiotic claim from a football coach turned GOP senator about trans girls making girls sports ‘extinct’ — enrages along both dimensions.”
(Wonkette was so impressed with this quote we are currently reviewing her inventory of dick jokes in preparation for the possible extension of an offer of employment.)
To be clear, under the filibuster rules, which could change if the GOP thinks abandoning this Senate tradition is important enough, the bill needed 60 votes to clear a procedural step — cloture — that would then allow an up-or-down vote on enactment. That final vote would have needed only the barest majority, and a tie can be split by the Vice President. But Republicans are not currently talking about eliminating cloture votes, and as long as the filibuster survives, the Protection of Women & Girls in Sports Act is dead.
Despite this victory depending on the GOP maintaining the filibuster and the fact that Republicans are constantly launching other attacks on immigrants, people of color, teachers, and many others, there’s good reason to celebrate the Dems acting like they know how to win. And many people are celebrating, including another former professional athlete and generally decent person, Chris Kluwe:
“I support and am happy the party came together to stop this.”
Of course the party pooper had to add:
“However, this is what they should be doing on EVERYTHING. I’ve said it before and I’ll keep saying it – we are in an existential crisis as a country. We’re either going to emerge as Americans, or as something else.”
And that is, indeed, where we are. Like a flash of lightning in the clouds, we are glimpsing an ephemeral brightening of hope. We live in the flicker, may it last as long as the old earth keeps rolling! But darkness was here yesterday. The GOP has lost only the first of the ebb.
Scottie's Playtime 