Material Girls: Review

Featured

Full disclosure: Kathleen, very kindly, donated a signed copy of her book which she took the trouble to post to me. This was done with the clear understanding that I am unlikely to agree with every one of her ideas or conclusions. It is true that I diverge on some, significant, issues. I do, however, highly recommend this book and I hope it gets a second edition as the public discourse facilitates more women speaking up.

Kathleen (Professor Stock) writes from the perspective of an academic, philospher, whilst currently holding a post within a UK University. She has been subjected to a campaign of villification, from within her own discipline, and the university sector more generally. Even the main union for University staff, UCU, has not stepped up to protect women in Kathleen’s position. I cannot begin to imagine writing this book, from within academia, and I commend her courage in doing so. As Kathleen points out there is a huge struggle to get dissenting voices into the literature on this topic. This book represents a significant milestone in breaking this silence.

My reception of the book probably deserves some clarity about my own perspective, or biases, if you will. I am not pure enough to claim the label radical feminist but I would say I am radical feminist adjacent; since their analysis makes the most sense to me. In a twist of fate I now find myself the mum of a trans-identified male and caught up in a fucked up, post modern, version of Sophie’s Choice. I am expected to hand my son over to the medical profession who, I am assured, will return a living “daughter”. My perspective is thus informed by both my feminism and the impact on my son. This is not easy terrain to navigate when you are also a stalwart defender of women’s, sex based rights. It also makes me more, perhaps too, inclined to want to understand motivations for homosexual transitioners. My compassion should not be taken as compromise where women’s rights are concerned.

A brief history of Gender Identity

The book traces the origins of Gender Identity as a concept and covers feminist voices who argued that feminism could be advanced by a more extreme belief that sex differences were wholly “culturally constructed”. She covers Simone de Beauvoir, John Money, Anne Fausto-Sterling (of “five sexes” fame), Judith Butler and also cites Julia Serano as one of the trans voices covered. I would have added the work of Janice Raymond to this list because “Transsexual Empire” is a seminal text on this area. Its omission may have been tactical because Raymond’s book tends to inflame those who see themselves as activists for the “Transgender” community.

John Money and Robert Stoller concieved of the idea we each have a “gender identity” which, as we have seen, is now being embedded in society and rapidly being privileged over biological sex.

1E4DDB5D-564C-4D60-B6CE-1971AEED8D2E

This chapter also covers the Yogakarta principles which are essential to understanding how activists envision a world where gender identity is embedded in the law. There is also a section on the origin of the term “Terf” ; which is useful for those of you unaware of the history of it’s coinage.

What is sex?

The What is Sex chapter is a good debunking of the common arguments claiming it is difficult to define sex, that we are not sexually dimorphic and conflating issues of intersex (disorders of sexual development) with a trans identity. It may seem ludicrous but some, self-identified, serious academics proclaim we didn’t know to which sex to deny the vote. Apparently it was all a random act of disenfranchisement based on the nebulous concept of “gender identity”. If only Emmeline had come out as Edward Pankhurst the women’s rights movement could have been exposed as a complete waste of time. Below is a seaside postcard from the time.

For those of a philosophical bent this chapter will particularly appeal. I have rehearsed these arguments with trans-activists over many years so much of the content was familiar. One of the key issues that resonates with me is that we must not simply reduce everything to XX chromosomes. I am thinking of women with no abiliity to process testosterone. Their chromosomes will be XY but they will have had a female (oestrogen led) puberty They often have no idea they have male chromosomes until they fail to menstruate. (I am thinking of twitter user @ClaireCais when I type this and some of the painful things she has had to endure). If only for women with DSDs this chapter is important. It is also a useful source to debunk the false conflation of a transgender identity disorders of sexual development.

Why Sex Matters?

Stock then goes on to make a compelling case for why sex matters. She covers medicine, sport, sexual orientation and sex based statistics on crime. Women are still fighting for a world which doesn’t treat males as the default humans. Denying that sex is a significant variable in many areas will further, negatively, impact women. For more on this you can read Caroline Criado-Perez.

Though it is possible that somebody at the Guardian has read Kathleen’s book since the clarification, below, is from the Guardian in July 2021!

063D8FFF-2B37-4BBC-904A-69E85DED4A55 

Now we are starting to see males competing, at the Olympics, in the women’s category will more people start speak out. Laurel Hubbard , who is competing in the 87kg women’s weight lifting category, may prove a tipping point.

Legal cases addressing the issue of males in women’s prisons and the recording of male sex crimes as if they were committed by women is also a key issue covered in this chapter. I have covered many such cases on my blog about this so I am pleased to see this.

What is Gender Identity?

The topic on Gender Identity I found a difficult read, for personal reasons. As a woman I instintively recoiled from Monroe Bergdorf locating the film “clueless” as prompting their thoughts of transition. After watching this film they state: “Oh my God, this is where I fit in, these are my people”. Stock does not include some of the more controversial utterances from Monroe Bergdorf; one of them being to demand that women stop centring reproductive rights on a women’s march. This won’t please all readers but I think she is wise to avoid more sensationalist copy.

The recollections of Paris Lees and other gay trans people echo what I know of the impact homophobic bullying can have on self-acceptance. Interestingly this is a Paris Lees quote from an article (London Review of Books 2014). This was quite an honest assessment and pre-dates Lees adding “Adult Human Female” to their twitter bio:

On the topic of homosexual transsexuals I , inevitably, find myself conflicted. I want boys like my son to be protected in all their variant masculinity. I don’t want to enshrine “gender identity” in law and legitimate the sterilising of likely gay males. Neither do I want those gay males, who do fail to reconcile to their sex, to be unprotected. What I do know is that “gender identity ” must never take primacy over biological sex, for the sake of women, and enshrining “gender identity” in law , i fear would be disastrous for women’s rights. Sex also matters for trans-identified people. It is dangerous to become so immersed in an identity you deny that sex matters for your health care.

I was pleased to see this statement in the book: in my view there are no cirumstances in which minors should be making fertility and health affecting decisions involving blockers, hormones or surgery”. Personally I take a harder line re decisions to embark on medical pathways. Achieving the magical age of majority is not sufficient for me. I know, from personal experience, our teenagers are being handed prescriptions with no counselling and no interrogation of what motivates a flight from their sex. I would ban it for under 25’s which we know is the average age of brain maturity. Whether it would deflect many from this path we can’t foresee. We do know many de-transitioners embarked on surgery, in their early twenties, only to regret it. Persuading legislators of this is likely to be an uphill, near impossible struggle at this moment in time. Alarm bells should be rining as the number of detransitioners in increasing daily. Sadly I fear many more broken bodies before this madness gets reined in.

In this chapter the author also attempts to elucidate the position of various schools of thought on Gender Identity. This is no mean feat giving the contradictions inherent in Gender Identity Ideology. This chapter uses the terminology of Trans Idealogues comparing “Cis” people to “trans people” and even using “non-trans”. That will irk some readers. I, however, see this chapter aimed at an audience (academics? politicians? ) who have wholesale adopted the nomenclature of Gender identity Ideologues. The chapter does end with an unequivocal statement warning of the danger in accepting something which is “in danger of looking unverifiable as when Stonewall tells young people “” Someone else can’t tell you what your gender identity is – only you know how you feel””. This is not a sound basis on which to enact legislation, perhaps using trans based language will convince more people?

What makes a woman?

There follows a long chapter interrogating “What makes a Woman” and looking at the definition of Adult Human Female versus Woman as Social Role. I suspect some people view this chapter as capitulation and some as compassionate. I subscribe to Adult Human Female but welcome the recognition that some people have built their lives around the narrative “Trans Women are Women”. These quotes sum up the difficulty, with the demand that the word “woman” is handed over to males in flight from their sex.

Marilyn Frye is quoted on page 152:

“If a woman has little or no economic or political power, or achieves little of what she wants to achieve, a major causal factor is she is a woman. For any woman of any race or economic class being a woman is significantly attached to whatever disadvantages and deprivations she suffers be they great or small” In response to the (much longer) quote Stock argues “Getting rid of the concept WOMAN would mean we couldn’t desribe, explain, predict or manage these distinctively caused phenomena”.

To those who have built their lives around the idea they are really women, Stock has this to say:

“People have built their lives around this narrative. Perhaps it feels as though I’m ripping all that away, and that causes you pain”.

I have seen this pain up close and its not the performative, twitter, transperbole: though that certain exists. It can be raw and very real. I think compassion has a very real place on this topic and it needn’t include abandoning a very clear view about the necessity for sex based rights and a male exclusionary feminism. We don’t need to be inhibited from centring women in our feminism, indeed it is a necessity if women’s rights organisations are to serve women, as a sex class.

Once again, I quote Miranda Yardley (male transsexual): “Refugees from masculinity exist” and add my own caveat “it is not women’s job to run the refugee camps”.

Immersed in a fiction

This chapter begins with some commentary on the passing of the Gender Recognition Act, 2004. This enshrined to idea of a “legal fiction” allowing males, then the vast majority, to have their birth certificate at amended to show their sex as female. Its astonishing to see the quality (or lack thereof) of contributions to this debate. Well worth checking hansard to look at the discussions. Below is a link to historic archives on Hansard. I find myself in the unusual position, for me, of recommending Norman Tebbit’s contribution which Professor Stocks also references in this chapter.

Hansard Archive on GRA

Stock them goes on to discuss the difference between fiction and reality and quotes both Miranda Yardley and Fione Orlander. I met both Fionne and Miranda on the same night and it was the first time I spoke publicly about my situation. Here Miranda clearly states ” I now disavow use of the word “woman” for myself and other transgender males, preferring to use the term “transsexual” or “transsexual male”. I should also point out that both Miranda and Fionne used male facilities at the meeting.

Stock covers the therapeutic benefit , to the individual, of being immersed in a fictional belief about your place within the sex binary. She also expresses concern about the risk of losing capacity to think rationally about your biological reality. This detachment from reality can be maladaptive and harmful. Moreover what latter day trans activists are increasingly demanding is the coercion of others to overtly participate in this fiction. This can result in the controlling of others around you. I was particularly pleased to see this sentence“Yet it isn’t reasonable to expect the person who gave birth to you, or the person who married you, or your own children to permanently relate to you mentally as of a different sex when they know you are not”

In addition the author sounds the alarm about the corruption of data which occurs when “gender identity” is substituted for sex. A particular danger is to criminalise speech such as “misgendering”. Something, by the way, which is already criminalised in some of the United States.

How did we get here?

This chapter is an excellent overview of how trans-activists have been allowed to lobby government to set the legal agend whilst politicans were negligent, in seeking contributions from women’s groups. Stonewall figure prominently, as do Mermaids, and The Guardian newspaper does not emerge covered in glory. Jess Bradley of Action for Trans Health is also consulted. Professor Stock refrains from any reference to the sacking of Jess Bradley. He was the first Trans Officer at Manchester University and departed for sharing a bit more his anatomy ,at work, than would be considered decent.

This chapter has an excellent overview of the propaganda deployed to further Transgender Ideology. One of these is the egregious use of suicide statistics, which are based on dubious data. Hate crime statistics also create a false narrative about widespread abuse of this population.

This chapter also looks at the pornified representations of women and those public “transwomen” who draw on these depictions to demonstrate membership of the female “gender”. These performances reify dehumanising representations of what it means to be a woman; another reason why women are not served by any alliance.

The chapter on autogynephilia is where our attitudes diverge. In part this because my empathy goes to the women who find their husbands are autogynephiles. These women are now getting a voice by organising as “trans-widows”. I have read enough of these accounts to see commonalities with men who coercively control their wives. Many of these women found themselves subject to degrading and humiliating treatment. At the extreme end it involved forced participation in sexual acts which validated their husbands alter ego. At the milder end women report having their personal style and friendship groups co-opted by their husbands almost as if they were replicating, or replacing, their wives.

Even, seemingly, benign, behavioural autogynephilia includes males inserting themselves into female spaces, and conversations, to gratify their need to assert their membership of the female group. The wives, or trans widows, then find themselves excluded from the support of women because their ertswhile husbands have colonised their places of refuge.

Kathleen asks why the lack of coverage, on the gender critical side, relating to trans-identified females. This is surely because, whilst it exists, androphilia (sexually fetishising a male identity) is relatively rare? Women tend to focus on “trans-men” as female and gay males. Gay males are latterly, waking up to the encroachment of these femaled on (gay) male spaces. Defending gay male spaces is surely the job of gay men and they do seem to be, belatedly, joining the debate in growing numbers.

A better activism in future.

Those not immersed in this debate may regard this chapter as even-handed and reaching out to those who have feared to dip their toe in the water. Others may bristle at the criticism of Radical/Gender Critical feminists.

Julia Long came in for some criticism by name. For the record I am an admirer of Julia Long’s uncompromising stance. I think we need straight-talking women who reject the mantle of “Be Kind”. As a (heterosexual) woman who lives with three males I think Lesbian feminists, of a separatist persuasion, have often been the clearest sighted about the threats Gender Identity Ideology poses to women’s rights. I wish I had listened to them sooner. I also find Julia funny, she has Ovaries of steel; and is unafraid to offend in her direct action. She appeals to my Yorkshire bluntness and I admire her, albeit from some ideological distance. She is unashamedly woman-centred and some of the terminology used is reminiscient of attacks used by Men’s rights activists. For me we need the range of activists challenging this ideology and some of the women shifting the overton window won’t be invited to the top table discussions but will have opened the doors for the women who do get a seat.

At the same time Julia warns about using terms, such as “transsexual” and “transwomen”. I no longer use the latter but I do sometimes uses the former whilst also sometimes, speaking plainly about “men”. I am inconsistent in my application and I don’t advocate for my, selective, approach as a basis for any women’s movement. It just happens to be a response to my personal circumstances. I choose to use less alienating language for those I love, or like and respect. I therefore do perform “polite fiction” on this issue and live with some cognitive dissonance.

Kathleen also warns about the alienating use of words like “mutilated” when describing the surgical harms to girls; subject to double mastectomies and other surgical procedures. Again those of us with our offspring’s skin in the game, literally, adopt different tactics in this area. I do regard these surgeons as butchers who are mining my son’s body for profit. I am angry about this. At the same time we need to find a welcome back, into the sex class they never left, for detransitioners. I was irritated by blue-tick feminists (not Kathleen) getting the vapours about some graphic images of phallioplasty procedures. Simultaneously nobody wants to exacerbate the regret of those who have found their way out of the gender cult. This is extremely difficult terrain to navigate because we want people to stare directly at the reality and not minimise by using euphemisms like “top surgery”.

The chapter outlines some ways in which these disparate groups might make common cause. I honestly don’t know if the extreme sex denialism, of the Trans lobby, will allow for compromise. Will it allow women the right to define ourselves and exclude males in any settings?

At an individual level, I find some of the more ruminative transsexuals, suprisingly, find meaning in a radical feminist analysis. They see common elements in questioning sex based expectations and are reflective on how they may have been followed very diffent paths had they encountered this framework. At the same time I know of transsexuals who found Kathleen’s analysis of their path as an immersion in a fiction meaningful. Invariably these are homosexual transsexuals who are not quite so invested in the need to validate the “woman” they wish to consecrate their lives to….

It is possible therefore that some of the linguistic concessions, in this book, will reach a new audience who would shrink from the plain speaking of a Janice Raymond. It is also a book written from within existing employment in academia and that surely has an impact on which audience it is intended to reach.

One page 272, there is a really useful list of all the areas which need more exploration (data) and research. She devotes three pages to these areas and it is quite shocking to consider the policy decisions taken without this data. Stock argues that their is a “surfeit high theory” in activism and public discussion. This includes Trans Studies. She goes on to say “High theory is abstract, totalising, seductively dramatic in its conclusions and relatively insulated from any directly observable empirical consequences – which ….makes it harder to dislodge”. She then returns to a critique of Judith Butler whose conclusions are “reached through a byzantine set of theoretical manoevres”. I think it fitting that a critique of the High Priestess of Gender Bollox is in the conclusion.

My conclusion. I think this is a very important book. I imagine every single reader will diverge at some points with the book’s stance. We all are in this with varying perspectives and we need to navigate a path to enable disagreements to be voiced from within feminism. I am one of six sisters and only one of them feels able to agree with me. I still love them and hope they will come round. Thanks for writing this book Kathleen. I hope I have done it justice.

Researching Gender Identity Ideology and its impact on Women and our Gay Youth. Support is always appreciated (I have no income). All my content is open access so if you can’t speak publicly, and you have spare cash, this helps me maintain some independence.

£10.00

Barings Foundation 2

Featured

Barings Foundation 1  is here if you want the background. 

This foundation not only funded the administrative support for the All Parliamentary Group for LGBT they also supported salary costs to embed a Stonewall employee in the Department for International Development. Curiousity piqued I resolved to have a look at what else they fund. I looked at all 163 grants given in 2020 but, for the purposes of this blog, I started drilling down to the funding allocated under the label “International Development”.

The issue is not one of a lack of transparency. All their grants are searchable. Guidance to setting up a Private, charitable foundation highlights the advantage of this vehicle for philanthropy: it allows the foundation to have complete control in terms of their funding priorities.

From 2013 this 👇 became the focus of Baring Foundation’s allocation for “International Development”.

“This programme aims to support civil society organisations to address discrimination against lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and intersex (LGBTI) individuals and communities in sub-Saharan Africa. It focuses particularly on lesbian and transgender communities”.

Prior to 2013 the foundation had spent over ten years targeting issues of “gender” and many of the grants were available to women and girls. This is their new focus as the above quote illustrates.

This is a list of all the grants. All of them are either entirely focussed on Transgender causes or at least reference Gender Identity Ideology. Only the Forum for the Empowerment of Women seem the most focussed on actual lesbian issues. Looks to me as if they were included because it is transphobic to imply that Lesbians can’t be “transwomen”.

3E6E8CAD-6CD4-4025-AF6B-D2292EBE34D2

I have examined every one of these organisations via their websites. Even those that appear to be about Lesbians seem to have rather an elastic definition of what constitutes a “lesbian” and talk of diverse sexual identities.

Social, Health & Empowerment: Feminist Collective

Let’s look at the Social, Health and Empowerment , Feminist Collective. This group, they advise advocates for African transgender and intersex women and claims to employ a feminist framework.

D23F4D5C-B6B0-4C97-A89E-05421AADE5A6

Centring themselves in a discussion of women’s reproductive rights: Check ✅

Making sure the feminist message is rammed home by celebrating er, Beauty Pageants. 😳

642F86F1-0C4B-4057-8E49-058954DA4DDB

Of course no self-respecting feminist group would be complete without undermining the rights of the same sex attracted people. This is how they redefine homosexuality.

1145DB88-77FA-478E-B71D-2E02920BDE3F

The idea that a London based organisation is funding a group who are denying sexual orientation, on a continent where it remains illegal in many countries, should concern you. See my earlier post for the state of play re Lesbian and Gay rights on continental Africa.

Lesbian & Gay Rights in African countries

Website here for S.H.E here 👇

S.H.E

Let us look at another the Forum for the Empowerment of women. This website mainly focuses on black lesbians but nods to the Gender Identity Ideology with a reference to SOGI (Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity). It is difficult to ascertain if this organisation takes the money and does the bare minimum to demonstrate allegiance to any conditions attacked to their grants. Fair play to them if they do!. Website below. Most of the initiatives relate to Black Lesbians and are concerned with violence against this community and forging networks and up-skilling women to gain a footing in the corporate world. Website below. 👇

F.E.W

The largest sum went to Uhai.Eshari. They have a very unresponsive website but Barings published a case study on their organisation. Here is a clip. They have been given £760,000 since 2018. All to support queer and gender diverse communities.

000C3DD6-199F-4F3F-98C3-C19269090980

Every one of these organisations promote Gender Identity Ideology. Projects are in Ethiopia, Malawi, Tanzania, Zimbabwe, Uganda, Burundi, Democratic Republic of Congo and this is by no means an exhaustive list. This is what the are doing in Kenya. Maybe there are some more pressing needs in these communities than rolling out “Gender Affirming Care” to some of the poorest nations on earth?

Kenya is often hailed as a success story in terms of its economic development over the past decade. It is not the poorest country on the continent. Here a couple of issues highlighted by Oxfam Kenya.   Gross inequality and 40% are without access to basic health services. C73C523C-F54E-44D8-B9BB-9E4F930F0FA6

Sexual violence remains a significant issue and has surged during the Covid Pandemic. AE07F33B-CCC8-48EA-BF61-D2D525E618C6

Another organisation funded by Barings Foundation is  Gender Dynamix.

They also focus soley on Trans and Gender Diverse Communities. What struck me about this organisation was the link to a consent form for accessing masculinising or feminising treatments.

You can see the document here:

Consent Form Feminising 2019.pdf – Google Drive

Here are some clips which jumped out at me.. First up the possibility that your sexual orientation may change temporarily or permanently. This is reminiscent of Gay Conversion Therapy.

A723754B-54DE-4ECF-9A1A-6C6006F5CAA5

Secondly a list of side effects from feminising treatments. These list the impact of hormone treatments only. 

788C195D-A306-4E2D-A17E-B6DD3ABDABF9

Arundhati Roy called charitable foundations a way to “parlay wealth into power”. We should look at what those badging themselves pro-social justice with as much suspicion as any wealthy individual/group forcing through social change on the basis of their own ideology.

Is it wise to export this ideology to countries with no, or only recent, acceptance of homosexuality?

2021-04-04 (3)

I am unwaged so any support much appreciated.  If you are in a similar position a share is just as good.  Thank you! 

Researching Gender Identity Ideology and its impact on Women and our Gay Youth. Support is always appreciated (I have no income) but I would be equally happy if you contributed to a legal case or a crowdfunder for Lesbian and Gay News.

£5.00

Lesbian & Gay Rights in African countries.

Featured

In order to contextualise the exporting of Gender Identity Ideology to the African continent it is necessary to look at the current legal position in respect of Lesbian and Gay rights. In many countries it remains illegal to be homosexual and , even where it is legal, this is relatively recent. Furthermore where laws have been enacted it doesn’t necessarily correlate with social attitudes within countries. It is possible that laws favoured by metropolitan elites do not necessarily translate transform prejudice overnight. It is also important that any data looks at the treatment of Lesbians and Gay males separately. As you can see they are not always treated equally.

3F5FBC7F-4AD6-4EB6-AB18-CACC3E952348

Source

Furthermore where laws have been enacted it doesn’t necessarily correlate with social attitudes within countries. Passing laws, favoured by metropolitan elites, do not necessarily transform prejudice overnight.  A point made by an organisation (ILGA) who are one of the main drivers for the propagation of Gender Identity Ideology which, from one perspective, is increasingly at odds with Lesbian and Gay rights. 

8B638599-A0F4-4D32-84CA-C80C4973ECC7

he same site also tracks Trans rights across the same geographic area.  Note the number of countries that allow legal recognition, on the basis of “gender” with no requirement for any level of commitment re bodily modification. 

8581A36F-828D-49CB-BB2A-168652E39D71

Thus there are large swathes of territory in Africa who have approved, effectively, introduced a form of Self-Identified “gender” as well as areas where there is a degree of ambiguity or, at least, no prohibition. One can only fear the consequences in a country which outlaws homosexuality but allows a form of “transition”.

A case in point would be Iran: Homosexuality is illegal and subject to extreme punishment.

39B4F0D3-5D0A-4592-A66C-7CB018246BC3

In contrast.

7C1DB69B-92B0-42FD-A7EC-709C171BBB67

This article, from 2014, shows the unintended (or intended?) consequences of that disparity in treatment between the LGB & The T.  In this article a Lesbian talks about how she was subject to discrimination for failing to conform to sex stereotypical modes of dress and expression.  Her route out was seven years of cross sex hormones until she finally accepted that she was simply a Lesbian.  

Trans Away The Gay

It seems astonishing to me that more campaigners for Gay Rights do not see the inherent danger of promulgating Gender Identity Ideology in countries with a fragile, or no, acceptance of homosexuality. However, lest we feel smug at the enlightened nations of the West, see this blog on our own version.

The Woke Gay Conversion Therapy?

Posting this to document the situation on the African Continent in preparation for part two of my piece on a U.K. Foundation promoting Gender Identity Ideology, across Africa, under the badge of funding for International Development.

Researching Gender Identity Ideology and its impact on Women and our Gay Youth. Support is always appreciated but I would be equally happy if you contributed to a legal case or a crowdfunder for Lesbian and Gay News.

£5.00

Talcum X talks Butler Bollox

Featured

Owen Jones talks to Judith Butler the Queen of Queer Theory. Full transcript attached. It was almost impossible to work out where the punctuation was intended. Apologies in advance to the Grammar police, I may have lost the will to live at some point. Transcription errors are mine. Failures of logic are Butler’s.

Owen Jones and Judith Butler

Here is the YouTube.

Owen Jones and Judith Butler

Who will rid me of these pesky transphobes?

OJ seems very keen to draw Butler into his public disagreement with Suzanne Moore. The piece starts, quite abruptly, with Butler criticising an unnamed woman who, we learn later, is Suzanne Moore. I would call this a response but it bears little resemblance to Moore’s actual writing on this topic. JK Rowling also comes under attack, as do feminists Janice Raymond and Sheila Jeffries. All women. When a man seeks to draw women, oops Non-binary persons, into criticising their fellow women, I am a tad suspicious of the driving motivation.

Plenty of men have expressed skepticism about Gender Identity Ideology, including Douglas Murray (Gay Man) and Piers Morgan. He could have also targeted Simon Fanshawe (Stonewall founder and Gay man) who gave his support to LGB Alliance. Why did Jones pass up an opportunity to skewer his, male, political opponents? Instead he has his sights trained on a bunch of left-wing, trade union, women. Could it be that Owen knows what biological sex is when it matters….to him?

Transphobia and Islamophobia. 

Owen asks Butler for her opionon on what is happening with British transphobia. Butler hesitates, for about a millisecond, to be the kind of American who comments on other countries. In her reply Butler hands Owen the answer he wants about British feminists, and simultaneously demonstrates her their complete ignorance about the U.K context. Butler is another U.S “feminist” who would be better concentrating on fighting for maternity leave and reproductive autonomy in their own country. U.K women will continue to fight for the sex-based rights these silly women are giving away. (Butler refers to UK women as silly and our arguments ridiculous so I make no apology for replying in kind).

BDE6BE39-66E8-4260-A310-26CE3B3CE0F8

If you are looking for dazzling insights, into feminism, prepare to be disappointed. If you seek incitement to hate on women, you came to the right place: It’s full of bitchwhistles. Owen, “I am not a misogynist” Jones runs through the usual slurs.

Transphobic. ✅

Racist.✅

Dismissal of “Older” women. ✅

Homophobic ✅

Owen deliberately ignores the impact of Gender Identity Supremacy on Gay Rights. What happens to SEXual orientation if men can claim to be Lesbians? Nowhere does he mention that many of us are parents of Gay Males. Some of us find it hard to see why calling our sons “girl” in the playground is “bullying” but when the Tavistock and Queer Theorists do it it’s affirmation”. Why let the truth get in the way of a bit of performative misogyny?

In Butler Land sex, is of course, assigned at birth. The way Butler talks about the inside of the delivery room is reminiscient of the bonkers group Action for Trans Health. For those of you who are unfamiliar with this group, let me remind you, they argued that identifying biological sex was a violent act of State coercion. Butler continues in this vein with the inevitable guff about chromosomes making sex so, so, complicated to determine. Butler’s ham fisted attempt to deny biological reality echoes an average day, playing intersex bingo, with the Queer Theory twitterati.

I expected she would have enough in her arsenal to make me second guess myself. Nope. Turns out What the Butler Saw was not much.

 The Trans person’s burden. 

The idea that “transphobic” feminists are responsible for the deaths of “trans” people is  how   Owen chooses to frame the interview. The  reference to suicide, at the outset, is grossly irresponsible. To promulgate the False suicide narrative, knowing people who identify as “trans” are among his most devoted acolytes, shows a reckless disregards for the dangers of fostering suicide ideation. Not only is this contrary to Samaritan’s guidance, on media coverage, it is cheap, emotional blackmail.  This is Butler’s response to Suzanne Moore’s purported stance. 18E90194-A10D-43EE-B2D3-74A3D81E368B

This is quickly followed by more transperbole. Women.  Look what you made me do!  Failure to recognise the preferred name/ identity of trans-identifying people means they will be unable to eat and breathe! 

AE50C213-73E6-48E7-8C7B-A05C0E02947D

Later Butler depict’s Moore defending of women’s rights as based on a deep, subjective feeling that women wish to deny others. 

F99D7FE0-7634-4948-B627-AE37816F553F You have just spent ages saying there is no right way to be a woman. Yet, here you are, saying being a woman is defined by  this  inner, subjective, feeling that we are woman. I don’t have this “genderfeelz” thing. I just am a woman. On the basis of this argument I will have to kick myself out of my own sex class… and see Butler in the non-binary section.  

After the diatribe on Moore’s failure to understand trans peope etc Butler makes an astonishing attack:

Now, when someone like Suzanne Moore says “Oh transwomen just think they’re women because of a feeling they have”, That’s a deeply dismissive, transphobic… I’m sure she would be proud to be transphobic I don’t think it’s a falsehood to call  her transphobic.  I think she values transphobia. She wants more of it in the world.

No wonder Jones felt obliged to insert this slide..

8D08CDAE-EAE8-4B80-B130-1BEF4433403C

Next up Butler bastardises feminist thought. They/Them repurposes centuries of work questioning the social construction of “femininity”, to better serve our Trans overlords.  UK feminists have long argued that Gender Identity appears to be based on regressive, sex stereotypes. Butler bollox twists this to lend credence to the foolish notion that we  have no idea what a man or woman is!   Queer Theory does not, in fact, deconstruct “femininity”, or “masculinity” , it merely reassigns the sex of anyone who doesn’t successfully perform sex stereotypes. Queer Theorists also throw in a veritable smorgasboard of other identities like a post-modern pick and mix.  Butler has, we later learn, opted for Non-binary, something inbetween. Sigh. 

What is a woman?

F6C2F968-E3BC-4BEC-AA8D-6AA962537FDC

This might fool a neophyte, like Jones, it ought not to have fooled so many others. Of course we should deconstruct societal expectations, of both femininity and masculinity. That should not mean reifying sexist stereotypes to assign flamboyant males, or butch women a new sex designation! Note the failure to conform to uber pornified “femme” presentation covers many more of us than Butch lesbians. It’s the stereotypes. Stupid!

More on the same theme. Who are these Women who do a thing and then immediately think, the doing of the thing, means they are “not really a woman”. When I was the person paying the mortgage one of the banks we applied to only had the option for MAN:Yes or MAN:No. This was twenty years ago, in England, not Afghanistan! Who exactly was telling me this was not something a woman should do? Could it be that the computer system was designed by a bloke still shocked that women had their own bank accounts? Why would this make me question my sex, rather than note the sexism?

85BDC421-8FD7-4796-8B5B-1A0C16B2EEAF

What is “gender”?

The current trend for asserting the primacy of “Gender Identity”, over biological sex, is doing the EXACT same thing as rigid enforcement of sex appropriate roles. Are you are girl who likes short hair, trains, playing with boys, computer games? Are you really a “boy”? Same for boys who are bakers not fighters. It’s so utterly regressive. Before all this Queer Theory bollocks we were making some headway fighing to liberate females and males from these constraints. NOW? Oops I seem to be a great scientist and I fancy women: I must really be a man.

Butler’s arguments are so full of hesitation, deviation and repetition. They are also hard to follow. We are informed that, after Butler publishing her book,Gender Trouble, she had some negative feedback from the Trans community and how she learned to listen to trans people. They were were at pains to dispute the idea their Gender Identity was not innate. Butler offers up trans theorists who claim an innate Gender Identity and advises this is an area of much debate within “trans-studies”. She is abject in her desire to learn at the feet of the great trans theorists and scold’s transphobic feminists for not reading her recommended gurus. (We have, Judith. We just thought it was regressive claptrap, but, hey, maybe if it were not for my #LadyBrain I could grasp how this is meant to be progressive).

Butler concedes that there is a vast difference in expections of 1950’s women to modern day expectations. She understands the formation of “Gender Identity” varies according to historical context but still claims “Gender” is so deeply seated it is not really a choice.

48643B4C-921F-472B-B454-E6F7ABCB4F30

So it’s not chosen. It’s not innate. It’s historically changeable but also deep seated. These are the kind of intellectual acrobatics required to include Bearded Lesbians, like Alex Drummond, under the trans umbrella.

Butler also takes issue with the misunderstandings about Gender which she patiently explains, obfuscates. Gender is performative but not a performance, its deep-seated but not innate, it is performative but it’s not artificial, it’s a powerful social and historical reality but it isn’t just based on sex stereotypes. Keep up on the back benches. Are you really going to legislate based on this nebulous concept?

6F0621D6-9E82-4027-920D-820B27163AC9

Here is how Butler experiences their “gender”. Seeing so many drag queens in gay bars helped Butler understand that some men could out perform her in “femininity”. Yep. People. This is what passes for progressive thinking. Women who don’t perform in the s expected way are somehow failing at being women and therefore must be non-binary? Men? #NobodyDoesItBetter apparently.

Stonewall and Historical Revisionism

Below Owen reminds us that Stonewall only added campaigning for the T in 2015. It has taken just five years to destroy an organisation once remarkable for it’s work defending gay rights. As we can see from this clip they justified this by the historical revisionism which claims Transwomen were key players in the Stonewall Riots. This is an egregious lie. In fact the Stonewall Riots were started by a Lesbian and supported by Gay men. Transsexuals /Transwomen played a minor, to non-existent, role. To see OJ cravenly thanking trans people for their liberation, as a gay man, is cringe-making. Later in the piece both Butler and Jones criticise historical revisionism and completely overlook this example of their own. In the same section Butler claims that post-modernists are not in the business, as far as she knows, of denying facts. Pull the other one.

F6C3E574-9080-497D-980D-C0F99949B830

RUTH HUNT

CDDED25D-B9E4-43FF-A6D4-3EAC28D8709B

(Ruth Hunt now has a seat in the House of Lords. For swelling the Stonewall coffers with Trans Lobby cash and, in doing so, destroying the reputation of a once venerable organisation. Interview with Ruth Hunt , below, on Hard Talk makes it clear she measured success by revenue. Looking forward to how Ruth Hunt revises her history when the damage to young lesbians becomes clear. https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/w3csy97p)

Next up. This is how Butler characterises writers like Janice Raymond and Sheila Jeffries and women who are campaigning for penis free spaces. This argument would not be out of place on a Men’s Rights Forum, because this is exactly what this movement is. Butler below doing the classic #NotAllMen so beloved by MRAs and TRAs.

Once again. We exclude ALL men to safeguard women and girls from the FEW. We exclude ALL men not just for safety but for privacy and dignity. It is perfectly reasonable for women and girls to wish to undress, shower and acccess the toilets in FEMALE ONLY spaces.

F829EF5B-644B-44D5-8C12-29D8AF345108

Here she is on JK Rowling. Women talking about a history of domestic abuse are leveraging their trauma in order to persecute others!

97A0361C-05AA-4822-9127-39F90074152B

Here are JK Rowling’s actual words.  Trigger warning.  They are PERFECTLY REASONABLE!

JK Rowling Statement   

Owen commits and unpardonable faux-pas! 

To end.  Well worth watching this snippet to see Owen spluttering an apology after making a capital error and failing to respect Mx Butler’s identity!   OJ decides to ask a question from one of his viewers and …

He, of course, blames the questioner..another woman and Butler makes her their feelings perfectly clear.  

7B84B34D-2897-45E3-B5BE-EE051D448AC0

Lol!

3456B102-0876-4400-8C56-ECD6A1494BDE

Agreement?

I didn’t disagree with Butler on everything.  She gives a creditable account of why the work of Kimberle Crensaw is important. Not withstanding the reputation of intersectional feminism is now utterly ruined by the parasitic leeching of Gender Identity Ideology.  It is certainly true that women could have made common cause with refugees from masculinity  IF they had not turned out to be neo-colonialists.  Certainly those of us who are not willing to give up our sex based rights are not, as Butler mischaracterises us, unconcerned with structural racism.  Once again the hijacking of #BlackLivesMatter by the obsession with trans issues has haomorrhaged respectability for that campaign, but the initial aims were laudable.

I also wholly endorse this statement though for rather different reasons than Butler 

182CAA5E-B084-4776-86EA-A69F08EAFC2E

If you can support my work your contribution would be deeply appreciated. I am able to speak up because I have no employer, and therefore no income. If you have the latter but are not able to speak up this is a way you can help.

£5.00

All Parliamentary Group on LGBT: Statement on GRA

Featured

This group was founded in 2015 and its membership is drawn from all political parties in the UK Parliament. They are also closely aligned with Stonewall as is made clear on their website. https://www.appglgbt.org/secretariat.

The APPG is administered by Anna Robinson, who has served as the APPG Researcher and Coordinator and Researcher since February 2019. The Secretariat is supported jointly by the LGBT+ non-governmental organisations Kaleidoscope Trust, Stonewall, and Frontline AIDS.

APPG LGBT group was brought to my attention because of their, negative, reaction to the Government statement on the Gender Recognition Act. Liz Truss, the minister responsible, announced that the government will not be allowing anyone to Self-Identify into the opposite sex class. You can read the statement here: https://www.gov.uk/government/news/government-responds-to-gender-recognition-act-consultation.

Saved file is here in case of Trans Revisionism.

APPG LGBT+ Chair’s Statement on the Government’s Response to the GRA Consultation — APPG on Global LGBT+ Rights

The APPG LGBT group, issued a statement expressing their disappointment with the government response. They also revealed they had attempted to broker a deal, behind closed doors, which they claimed would resolve the tensions over this issue. Unfortunately the document wasn’t published, prior to the decision. but I will cover the one they published after the fact and include it in APPG LGBT 2.

Argentina, and Ireland are frequently held up as exemplars of the policy of self-identification. Women’s groups were not consulted in either country. The Argentinian regime, then in power, seemed to be using it to distract from unsavoury elements of their government. There seems to be an inverse relationship between the countries who legislate for self-identified “Gender” whilst having less than progressive atttituded to women’s right to control her fertility. For more on Argentina see this thread: https://twitter.com/twisterfilm/status/1215336108776706050?s=21.

Anyone who has read my blogs on the Gender Recognition process may take issue with the idea that it is an invasive and onerous process. I have covered some of the people allowed to claim the status of “legal women” in a few of my posts.

HOW LONG HAS THIS BEEN GOING ON?  This is a case from 2009. GRC obtained whilst a serving prisoner and pre-op.  Released to a female bail hostel. Attempted to rape a woman 5 days later. Recallled to prison and won a legal case to be moved to the female estate, still pre-op. 

Gender Recognition Certificates Or this case.  The Gender Recognition Panel turned this prisoner down multiple times.  A single judge was able to overturn the refusal and grant a GRC.  This to a thrice married, father of seven with a convicion for obtaining explosives with intend to endanger life. How very ladylike! 

Gender Recognition Panels: A Judge talks.   Here a judge speaks of her work on the Gender Recognition Panel. She describes the process as “enabling” and I agree; though I suspect I use the word in a different way to the way the good judge intends. A reminder. The fee to apply for a GRC was £140. There is no requirement for any bodily modification and applicants are not required to have a face to face interview. This latest announcement commits to reducing the cost and streamlining the process. Onerous? Invasive?  Or Reckless. 

Nothing is more galling than the “bad people on both sides” representation of this “debate”. It’s not women who are dishing out the threats of rape and violence. It is self-identified women, i.e. males, who appear to retain a very masculine committment to silencing non-compliant females, through fear. The idea that this is a “narrowly…held view” is laughable. Most people have not caught up with the idea that women must accept that women can have penises. When it is made clear that we are expected to give male-bodied access to female spaces it is roundly rejected. It remains to be seen whether the agression shown, even by *some* post operative transsexuals, has fatally undermined acceptance for this group. Not an outcome I wish for… Sex is a material reality. Gender is a set of reductive sex stereotypes. Males, who identify as women, have somehow internalised sex stereotypes as being natural and inevitable and this has given rise to a belief these can be transplanted into a male body. This is not Progressive and, interestingly, more and more transsexuals reject this dogma. They know they are male, or female, that sex is real. Many never anticipated that a tiny minority with real, intractable, Gender Dysphoria would be used like a battering ram to compromise women’s and gay rights.

We do not, routinely, assign a “gender” at birth. Nobody can, literally, change sex. Elsewhere the APPG LGBT argues for de-medicalising the process of “transition” which means nobody is expected to take serious. life-changing steps to change their gender permanently“. Stonewall , their partner, include part-time cross dressers under the trans umbrella. It is clear that we are not expected to research transvestic fetishism which is sexually motivated. I expect there are half a million “trans” people in the UK due to the wide ranging, criteria. Hell! We are pretty much all “trans” or “non-binary” by Stonewall Law.

The APPG LGBT group quote the high rate of responses to the GRA Consultation, which agree with the proposal  to dispense with any medical evidence and remove the requirement to “live in their acquired gender for two years”.  What they fail to mention is many of these responses clearly co-ordinated by an organised Lobby Group.  Indeed, rather shockingly, a children’s entertainer, on YouTube even persuaded children to get involved in filling out the GRA consultation.  Now deleted but if you check out Pop ‘n’ Olly he is a childrens entertainer who is pushing this on Kids, relentlessly.   This is a transcript of his content. Note it was produced in collaboration with Stonewall and Fox Fisher & Owl who are both trans activists.  ( I will do a series on Pop ‘n’ Olly and will include the blog which is the source for the clip below , with acknowlegement.) 

I blogged on Fox Fisher and Steph Kyriacou. Both produced content for ChildLine ( run by the NSPCC). Part-Two covers Fox Fisher, who also is linked to the Mermaids Charity for “trans-kids”/ Fox objected to being associated with Lesbians, Gay males and Bisexuals because it associated being transgender with “deviance”. A clip is included because Fox has now deleted it from their youtube.

Queering the NSPCC? Part Two: What it means to be Transgender.

Parts 7 & 8 cover some of Steph’s content, first for Child-Line and from their own channel.

Queering the NSPCC? Part 7: Trans Identity

Queering the NSPCC? Part 8: Sexual Identity and Gender Identity

No statement couls be complete without reference to the idea that Transgender people and suicide attempts. The statistic that 50% of trans people have attempted suicide has been debunked many times. It goes against Samaritan’s guidelines for responsible coverage of suicide. It is based on flawed data. It may actually foster suicide ideation in the very group you are purporting to be concerned about.

EC8B1818-3CEB-43D6-A25E-2E78F8FA4F8A

I blogged about it the flawed data around suicide attempts here:

Suicide in the Trans Community

The next issue that the APPG LGBT group are focussing on is a ban on Gay Conversion Therapy. This follows legislation passed around the world and of course I support a ban on any attempts to change someone’s sexual orientation. Its regressive, harmful and it doesn’t work. However, the APPG LGBT group are insisting that any legislation also includes “gender identity”. Thus any parent of a gay male or a lesbian who takes time to accept their sexuality and identifies, instead, as the opposite sex would, potentially, be criminalised for opposing medical treatment to modify their childs sexual characteristics , block puberty or commence cross-sex hormones. Geraint Davies, a Labour MP, tried to pass a private members bill which also included “Gender Identity” in a ban on Conversion Therapy.

So yes. I oppose any ban on “Conversion Therapy” when it includes “Gender Identity. This will result in a prohibition of therapeutic responses to a discomfort with biological sex/sexuality. We would not have an epidemic among young people, adopting a trans-identity, if we were not inculcating it in School teaching. I have covered many of these policies on this blog.

AF64A7CD-DC31-4DCA-980A-29A27BA8B1B0

By banning therapeutic responses to Gender Dysphoria we may, actually, be promoting a medicalised “Gay Conversion Therapy”.

Have a salary but can’t speak up for fear of losing your job/family/networks? I do this full-time with no income. Anything you can send my way allows me to keeo on keeping on ,

£5.00

British Psychological Society 5

Featured

DISSENTING VOICES. 

https://thepsychologist.bps.org.uk/volume-33/october-2020/freedom-expression-around-diversity-guidelines

A letter in response to the guidelines. Reproduced, in full, below.

Freedom of expression around diversity guidelines

Numerous psychologists call for review of the BPS Guidelines for Psychologists Working with Gender, Sexuality and Relationship Diversity; plus response.

Following the response to J.K. Rowling’s essay ‘Reasons for Speaking Out on Sex and Gender Issues’ and the 18 June Newsnight report of safeguarding concerns at the NHS Gender Identity Development Service, we call for an immediate review of the recent BPS Guidelines for Psychologists Working with Gender, Sexuality and Relationship Diversity (BPS, 2019).

These guidelines state that a ‘gender-affirmative’ stance should be the default position adopted by psychologists. We are concerned that the instruction to ‘integrat[e] an affirmative stance into their model of practice’ restricts the use of many core models (systemic, trauma-informed, developmental) in formulating the factors resulting in the clients’ presentation. This places limitations on researchers and practitioners exploring the wider context of ‘gender’ and seeking to establish ‘best-evidence’ for the support of individuals with gender dysphoria.

For those unfamiliar with the guidance or discussion in this field, ‘gender affirming’ practice calls for psychologists to work on the basis that an individual’s belief in self-ascribed gender is ‘valid and legitimate’. We hope all psychologists value and respect the varied understandings that people hold of the world around them and of their personal experience. We suggest it is possible to value and respect a client’s experience, without taking a position of affirmation. Indeed we often do this within our work with various client groups. The BPS guidance stipulates that practitioners validate a belief in gender (both in general and in particular to the individual’s sense of self) without considering the evidence base in relation to the practice of belief validation.

Individuals who are questioning their identity with respect to their sex and gender clearly report significant levels of psychological distress. The long-term implications for this population resulting from the provision or denial of access to treatment are substantial. We recognise that appropriate, evidence-based guidelines are imperative to support the skilled psychological practice which our profession seeks to uphold. However, such guidelines can only be effective when these are the result of comprehensive research, conducted in an environment that supports free and independent enquiry.

In particular, we think it is imperative that psychologists are not prevented from using our core professional skill of formulation, exploring the origins and nature of distress rather than ascribing to one pre-determined ‘diagnosis’ or explanation. With other presentations we are in agreement that there are multiple contributory factors to psychological distress. It is only from this exploration that we can develop individualised formulations to guide our attempts to alleviate that distress. We think the current guidelines effectively prohibit psychologists from taking a questioning approach and applying ethical practice in these situations. The absence of a robust evidence base supporting psychological and medical intervention is a concern in this rapidly growing population, leaving significant gaps in our understanding of many relevant issues. The disproportionate increase in presentations of females to services, the phenomenon of so-called Rapid-Onset Gender Dysphoria, the voices of individuals who have desisted or detransitioned, and the experiences of those for whom existing treatments have been of value must all be addressed in the search for quality research informing best-evidence practice. Such research can only be conducted in an environment that is open to discussion in a respectful and professionally inquisitive manner.

We would like to see the current guidance withdrawn and the topic reviewed afresh in accordance with the rules of proper intellectual inquiry: the weighing up of evidence; the ethical considerations of psychological practice; and the avoidance at all times of ad hominem forms of argument. Some of the signatories below, with others, have submitted a formal request for the withdrawal of the guidance to the Society. We hope that readers will support our expectation that the freedom of expression of all psychologists will be defended, unambiguously and at all times, in relation to both research and practice.

SIGNATORIES.  (Some names are witheld)

Dr Katie Alcock (Senior Lecturer in Psychology)

Rachel Corry (Occupational Psychologist)

Ms Nina Gadsdon (Psychology Masters Student)

Dr Louise Fernandes (Clinical Psychologist)

Ms Pat Harvey (Guinan) (Former Chair of the Division of Clinical Psychology)

Dr Peter Harvey (Former Chair of the Division of Clinical Psychology)

Mr Ian Hancock (Retired Consultant Clinical Psychologist, Director of Psychological Services, NHS Dumfries and Galloway).

Dr John Higgon (Consultant Clinical Neuropsychologist)

Dr Anna Hutchinson (Clinical Psychologist)

Dr Gill I’Anson (Consultant Clinical Psychologist)

Mr Eric Karas (Retired Consultant Clinical Psychologist)

Dr Jeanie McIntee (Consultant Clinical & Forensic Psychologist & Psychotherapist)

Dr David Pilgrim (Former Chair of the History and Philosophy Section) 

Julia Richards (Educational Psychologist)

Cas Schneider (Consultant Chartered Clinical Psychologist)

Karen Scott (Retired Educational Psychologist)

Dr Sarah Verity (Chartered Clinical Psychologist) 

Dr Robert Watts (Clinical Psychologist) 

Anne Woodhouse (Clinical Psychologist)

Colleagues who felt they needed to remain anonymous:

Consultant Clinical Psychologist NE England

Clinical Psychologist NE England

Consultant Forensic Psychologist S England

Clinical Psychologist NW England

BPS RESPONSE TO THE LETTER

Society response: We acknowledge that the BPS is a broad church, and there will always be differing views among our members on some issues. We are confident that our guidelines are based on the best current evidence and research in this important area, having been developed by experts working in the field. Clearly we share your concern about the safeguarding of children and young people, but our guidance is specifically for the care and treatment of adults, not children.

The draft guidance was sent out for Society-wide consultation on 19 March 2019. It was also sent to the Royal College of Psychiatrists, APA, BACP, BABCP, UKCP, Stonewall, LGBT foundation and COSRT for comment. At the close of the consultation on 12 April 2019 34 responses had been received. Just one of these responses mentions the issue of dissenting voices that is raised in your letter. This respondent also stated that the document was ‘well intentioned and positive’.

All our guidance is periodically reviewed. This particular guidance is the second version, having been revised in 2019. If there is a change in practice or evidence, then the need to revise the guidance would be established. In this instance, we will review the guidance if there are implications for the care and treatment of adults following the outcomes of:

  • the judicial review regarding the use of hormone blockers in child services on grounds of capacity to consent
  • NHS’s Independent review of puberty suppressants and cross sex hormones
  • NICE review of the latest clinical evidence.

As a Society we are committed to our members having a view and welcome different perspectives. As such any revised guidance will be sent out for Society-wide consultation and we would welcome your input into the revised consultation process.View the complete article as a PDF document
(Please note that some pictures may have been removed for copyright reasons)

If you are able to support my work please do so. I am unwaged and all my content is open.

Investigating the march of Gender Identity Ideology. The impact on Women’s rights and the cost paid by our Gay offspring & children on the Autistic spectrum.

£5.00

British Psychological Society 4

Featured

This is part 4 of a series on the British Psychological Society. This blog will examine the BPS treatment guidelines, from 2019. The 2012 version is covered in part three. The changes between the two versions are indicative of the level of mission creep. Unless otherwise indicated, all quotations are taken from this document. 👇

Guidelines for psychologists working with gender, sexuality and relationship diversity

Part One

In Part One I looked at the background to a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) that commits a number of organisations to reject Conversion Therapy

Part Two

In Part Two I looked at the BPS position statement, on therapy pertaining to sexual orientation, and examined the profiles of the authors. 

Part Three

Part Three looks in detail at the recommended treatment guidelines and illustrates how far they stray from the impression given by the position statement.

Part 4 : The 2019 guidelines. 

The authors/contributors.

The same names are involved, as were acknowledged in the 2012 version.  You can find out more about some of these names in earlier parts of this series.  Stonewall UK are also thanked for their help. 

What changed in the new Guidelines?

Gone are the warnings that caution is required before  any irreversible medical treatments Ditto  concern about the impact of Schizophrenia, or Aspergers, on Gender Identity Issues.  The fact that most children/teens, with Gender Identity issues, will, turn out to be mainly Gay males and Lesbians has also disappeared.  Why? What has changed?

581C1BA2-6123-40C2-88C9-2598B730ECE2

What has survived are the ideas around Sexual Identities / sexual practices. 

F9BE77F5-8A2F-45CF-B725-8C3E84A7B94E

Here we see that the guidelines encompass gender, sexuality and those with diverse relationships.  The phrase “assigned at birth is used, an ideological formulation to suggest it is not obvious in 99.9% of cases. Also “Cisgender”; another, contested, term claiming anyone comfortable with their biological sex  is in fact content with their “gender”.  As many of us point out, ad nauseum, accepting your biological sex does not mean you are comfortable with “gender” !  Especially since any definition of “gender” seems to be the based entirely on reductive sex stereotypes. 

Moving on, here is a full list of what the BPS includes under “diverse relationship/sexual practices”.  A veritable, word salad of queer theory inspired, nonsense. 

885CE9F1-FA31-4BCC-B4D5-47729FF8359B

The practice of BDSM is culturally specific and hardly a biologically determined part of sexuality. The claim this is all part of “human diversity” strongly implies all these “identities”  have been with us since the dawn of time.  A categorical falsehood which only survives by a historical revisionism,  deployed by Trans Activists, which shames Stalin. Anybody who confirms that women,and men, have always rejected the constraints of expected gender roles is simply retrospectively transed.

4CF1501B-31EE-400C-8017-EC7790C991CBMembes are instructed on use of  ⇒ ⇒⇒      preferred pronouns and warned not to stigmatise diverse sexual practices.    Polite pronoun use is one thing, however, the use of “expect”  and  “correct” smacks of compelled speech and underlines how authoritarian this movement is.   

 The dismissal of emotional problems and suicide attempts from this client group also seems dangerously lacking in curiosity, or research, into post-transition suicidality.  ⇓

0EF14087-EF50-4CE4-8CF6-0DA27F1A2CEA

Minority stress is undoubtedly an issue for Gay and Transsexual/Transgender clientele. I think it is over-stating the case to dismiss all of these co-morbidities as arising from lack of social acceptance. Some victims of sexual abuse locate their involvment, in BDSM, as a response to these experiences or even how the abuse manifested itself. Some women talk of their involvment in sadomasochistic practices as arising from/causing negative impacts on their mental health and self-esteem. Some transsexuals refer to the mental stress of “imposter syndrome” and the relief garnered from naming, and accepting, their biological sex.  The thinking underpinning these guidelines  seems to prioritise an ideology rather than centre the client’s well-being.  Sweeping all of these identities, sexual practices and relationship types into the prohibition of “conversion therapy”  may deny therapeutic help to vulnerable groups. Not analysing underlying /subconcious motivations seems reckless.  Yet, the BPS do exactly that: ⇓  

Who is covered by the prohibition of Conversion Therapy? 

313D919D-5BC0-40F3-BA81-E2C6977888E9

Autogynephilia & Fetishistic Tranvestism

It is also significant that all reference to fetishistic transvestism has disappeared from this edition of the guidelines. Another notable, I would also argue tactical, omission is the phenomenon of Autogynephilia (AGP). This is a paraphilia and affects heterosexual men. The clinical description is that they have an “erotic target location error” and are aroused by the idea of themselves “as a woman”. An AGP male can derive satisfaction, sometimes overtly sexual, from invading female spaces. Is it any wonder that activists do not wish to draw attention to this type of transsexualism/transgender identity?

4FD50AFF-4F11-48A2-8C8C-259965FDB932

Here there is a brief mention of the mental health conditions which may play a role in a particular “identity”.  This document is very keen to badge these as “extremely rare”.  

Notice the shaming tactic of inferring any dissent is  akin to racism.

The omission of the paragraph below, from the 2012 guidelines, is more transgender washing. Most people have no idea about autogynephilia, yet it is paraphilia documented for decades. It is also a condition for which men have sought treatment, rather than “transiton” . This begs the question of where they get this help when therapists simply affirm a trans identity.. This is also a tactical omission because acknowledging men adopting women’s clothing/identity, for erotic purposes, isn’t good public relations . Telling the general public, men with a sexual a paraphilia can safely be given to access women’s spaces won’t be appearing on David Lammy’s campaign literature any time soon. (Lammy is the UK, MP responsible for the passage of the Gender Recognition Act)

Too many policy makers are treating any male with a Cross-Sex Identity as if it magically transforms them, literally, into their chosen “identity”. This matters because we treat men, as a class, a certain way becauuse of the the statistical sexual offending rate against women.. There is no evidence this, changes “post transition” whatever that means no we are told it is transphobiv to expect a penectomy has been performed. In fact it sex offenders may, in fact, by higher judging my the males in the UK prison population. Moreover our politicians would know this if they had bothered to undertake any impact assessments. Instead they have shown a feckless disregard for women’s rights.

Social Engineering. 

Gender Identity  Ideology has gained such traction by the take over of bodies responsible for making policy and laws.  Here the BPS calls for its members to become active in policy making and their  community to  “effect change” . The wholesale social engineering  necessary to make organistations afraid to use the word “woman” dopt a whole new (dehumanising) language to describe us is not happenstance.  Its indicative of   institutional capture.  

CD5D9B02-B549-49E4-93EF-06C49D0DDE68

For emphasis I am including this next paragraph, even thought it is somewhat repeat some earlier points. Here the mandated belief is that sexual attraction operates based on “gender identity”. The wording is, I would argue, deliberately obfuscatory so it is not readily apparent that the BPS are actually de-coupling sexual orientation from sex. We have already been told that a male-sexed, and male-presenting person, can be a lesbian. Shouldn’t a therapist be able to explore what has given rise to this belief, because it is patently delusional. Is it ethicaly to endorse the boundary breaching this entails for the old fashioned kind of Lesbian. AKA WOMEN!

Below it is made explicit that no assumptions should be made about any medical interventions required, or undertaken. Once again, for emphasis, this is why more and more Lesbians and Gay males are starting to sound the alarm for what this means for their exclusive same sex orientation. This ideology parrots the idea that being “exclusive” in your, same sex, dating practices is “transphobic”. Does the BPS agree with this? What does this say about the legally protected characterisic of sexual orientation?

1840EF3C-B248-4E69-9232-C608AFB4FED3

If you have not yet acquainted yourself with the idea of “Lady Penis” then now is the time because it is being taught in primary schools. See my blog below.

That is right. Your children are being taught that some girls have a penis.

This paragraph is also worth reproducing to the maximum size possible. Basically if an obvious man, who belongs to the male sex, tells you that he is, nevertheless, a lesbian it is your duty to accept this. Then again he may wish you to call him “slut” . This immediately makes me wish I knew the relative price comparison for a session with a psychologist versus say, a dominatrix.

02ECAA2A-FCC6-45B0-B914-001435823ED5

Yep.  I went there.  Being call “slut” by a dominatrix is big in “femdom” and sissy porn.  Website below takes you to a content warning that it is only suitable for over 18’s.  You can get the drift from the promotional blurb. 

https://miss-kimberley.co.uk/

Here is a review: {I had better not be involved in a crime BTW as my search history….}

667D2022-3D53-4498-B50E-D19E8A11EF50

Ths next paragraph I believe is referred to as a bait and switch. There is growing evidence of the abuse, of female partners, by trans-identified males with Autogynephilia. However this document emphasises that a transitioning partner should not feel inhibited in complaining about an accepting partner. I imagine this excerpt will draw a rueful grimace from transwidows. This excerpt also inverts the power dynamics in a relationship where only one is non-monogamous or practices BDSM. These two “identities”, it is implied, will be the marginalised/oppressed. Thus, in one fell swoop, the woman with a partner who has sex outside the relationship, or pays to visit a Mistress Kimberley, will be deemed at the losing end of a power differential with his partner. This is gaslighting in a gimp mask.

FB9A152F-D585-4B3E-A3F6-785ED82BC3F9

Finally. In the previous version of the guidelines much more time was given to the potential implications of irreversible medical interventions on children/teens. In this version we are simply told that “reproductive optiions…may be more complex”.

82B66C50-C667-4681-8192-F4675544A826

I have lost count of the times I have been flat out contradicted for saying we are sterilising kids when we put children on puberty blockers. We are. When you put children, as young as 10, on puberty blockers they invariably progress to cross sex hormones. They will be infertile. We are doing this in the UK.

Finally in my next blog I will make it clear there is opposition/concern within the ranks of BPS members. 

Next up: THE 2019 guidance and some dissenting voices from within the BPS membership. 

If you are able to support my work please do so. I am unwaged and all my content is open.

Investigating the march of Gender Identity Ideology. The impact on Women’s rights and the cost paid by our Gay offspring & children on the Autistic spectrum.

£5.00

British Psychological Society 3

Featured

This is part 3 of a series on the British Psychological Society. This blog will examine the BPS treatment guidelines, referenced in the BPS position statement, covered in Part Two. Unless otherwise indicated, all quotations are taken from this document. 👇

Guidelines and Literature Review for Psychologists Working Therapeutically with Sexual and Gender Minority Clients (2012)

Part One

In Part One I looked at the background to a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) that commits a number of organisations to reject Conversion Therapy. The concern I have is the MOU to oppose “conversion therapy” includes both Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity. An unintended consequence is gay males and lesbians may be placed on an unnecessary medicalised pathway to “transition”. Ironically this is actually a form of Gay Conversion. Therapists should be able to prioritise reconciliation to biological sex/sexuality as the ideal outcome. Same sex orientation doesn’t involve lifetime dependence on cross-sex hormones/surgery. This MOU effectively bans therapists / parents from affirming biological sex and sexuality.

In Part Two I looked at the BPS position statement, on therapy pertaining to sexual orientation, and examined the profiles of the authors. The BPS statement mentions “gender identity” only in passing, yet the full guidelines centre Gender Identity issues as much as sexual orientation. This has all the hall marks of yet more “stealth” activism.

Part Two

Part Three looks in detail at the recommended treatment guidelines and illustrates how far they stray from the impression given by the position statement. Even the title deviates from a focus on Sexual Orientation: “Psychologists working therapautically with Sexual and Gender Minority Clients”.

Unsuprisingly some prominent people from the UK main Gender Identity Clinic / Trans Activists  were involved.

0A523C7F-ADE8-4BF7-A0CA-B1CD8E684FE2

Christina  Richards is employed at the Gender Identity Clinic (GIDs)  sometimes, informally, referred to as the Tavistock. You can read about Christina here.  Richards has a very high profile in the field of Gender Identity and especially in organisations which promote an “affirmation only” approach to Gender Dysphoria. :https://christinarichardspsychologist.wordpress.com/

Christina may also be remembered for defending a job advert which sought to recruit more people to work at GIDs and included this memorable part of the selection criteria: 

FAEBDFBB-166F-4C25-A56A-9CECF5CC9FD7

Polly Carmichael is the director of the Gender Identity Service (GIDs) as I write.  Penny Lenihan is also a psychotherapist based  at GIDs.   Meg Barker (now Meg-John) is an activist who campaigns on Bisexual issues and was the author of a bat-shit crazy document for the BACP (British Association of Counsellors and Psychotherapists). She campaigns for the  recognition of those practicing  BDSM/Kink /polyamorous relationships.   Meg also thinks Bi-sexuals are stigmatised by the assumption that they are involved in diverse sexual practices.  She/He/They/Zie (who the hell knows/cares?)  states that the “bi” in “bisexual” is problematic as it suggests there are only two genders.  Of course, sexual orientation is described, as same gender attraction which, as we now know, is not synonymous with biological sex. This has the effect of undermining  Same-Sexual Orientation.   (See later definition of “lesbian”)

Note also contributor Christine Burns, a prominent Trans Activist and editor of a collection of essays,  in the book “Trans Britain”.  Also Stephen Whittle, who obtained law qualifications,  to better advocate for trans rights.  These two names crop up numerous times, both are “trans”

Sexual Identities. 

Here is a flavour of what the authors mean by “sexual identities”. It is not, as you may have expected, a reference to different sexual orientations. It includes sexual practices such as sado-masochism, transvestism as well as the more benign sounding asexuality.

2233BAF6-6F8C-48B5-9CA2-4A28316E47C3

The BPS document is very clear it includes “Fetishistic Transvestism” as shown by the quote below. Bear in mind that transvestites, now referred to as part-time cross-dressers, are officially under the Trans Umbrella, according to Stonewall UK. I wonder if this definition will appear in the 2019 version of this document? The protection of “sexual minorities” is now extended to people with a paraphilia, and by people I mean men. Remember this when you tweet out vacous statements about supporting people to “live as their authentic self”. I am pretty sure most people don’t realise this is what we are being asked to sign up to…. Did the MOU signatories?

Here we are reassured that not all of the cross dressing men, now officially transgender, are fetishistic. Once again women cry: “How do we know which one’s?”. Remember single sex spaces are not because all men are predators but because a minority are. The same applies to men. who identify as transgender. How do we know which part of the umbrella they come under? Too many policy makers are treating any male with a Cross-Sex Identity as identifying as if this magically transforms the statistical sexual offending profile to literally equate to that of natal (for emphasis only) women. There is no evidence of this, quite the contrary.

BDSM (Bondage, Discipline, Sadism & Masochism)

Another aspect of Gender Identity Ideology is the integral notion of power relations between “genders”.  The notions of dominance and submission are necessary for sexual power games. The only subversion here is sometimes the sexes get to “play” different roles.  The hierarchy remains intact but, gender identity ideologues argue, this somehow undermines “gendered expectations” and liberates us all!   BDSM normalises the notion of pain, submission and servitude.   To get an idea of just how liberating this has been, for women, find me a man who has died at the hands of a woman who then used then used the “rough sex” defence to avoid prison. Doesn’t happen.   

5C351219-0097-4A42-B253-49D9CBB35A1D

To get a further idea of just how regressive this is let me quote an excerpt from a Master’s thesis. It was written by a man who documented how BDSM helped cement his identity as a transwoman. He had an unpleasant, sexual, encounter where his safe words were disregarded by the other participant. This is what he took away from that encounter:

“Sex Work”. 

Naturally Queer Theory proponents avoid the unpleasant truth about prostituted women. Despite the fact clients are practically always men and the percentage of male prostitutes, also servicing men, are dwarfed in comparision to the females. The clinicians are warned about pathologising issues such as sex addction and pornography use.

In an outbreak of honesty they do, briefly, acknowledge there is a body of work (See Gail Dines) on the objectification of women in pornography.

The centrality of pro-prositution arguments within Trans-Activist ideology is indicated by the two slurs used against women, who question this belief system. These are Swerf and Terf, acronyms for Sex Worker/Trans Excusionary Radical Feminists. Some radical feminists are ex prostituted women who remain deeply concerned for the women who remain in prostitution. Others are opponents of the sale of women’s bodies and care deeply about the women labelled “sex workers”. Here the BPS pay lip service to the women who need an “exit strategy” . (What work requires an exit strategy?) but shamefully tries a “bad on both sides” argument re the perpetrators of violence. Even worse it suggests the “sex workers” need a route to empowerment and to learn to be assertive. Shame on everyone who agreed with this paragraph.

The centrality of pro-prostitution narratives is striking in prominent Trans activists and Celebrities. Janet Mock saw prostitution as a good way to validate their “womanhood”. Mock even compared prostitution to the underground railway that enabled Black people to escape the South and Slavery. Seeking male validation of your womanhood, via prostitution, runs counter to feminist campaigns to reject our commodification/ objectification. Yet another example where the “feminist” agenda of ,self-described, Transwomen, actually undermines women’s position in society. It is almost as if the interests of the new kind of women are perfectly in tune with men’s rights and diametrcally opposed to the interests of women.

I have seen many sad stories about gay males entering prostitution to fund their flight from their sex and sexuality.  I have not seen any voices expressing concern about the rate of prostituted males killed in countries like Brazil.  We see lots of concern about the deaths of transwomen but very little acknowledgment that their deaths are related to the prostitution industry which has a a high rate of violence and death.  Not so much empowering but devouring this demographic.   Clients are overwhelmingly men despite the attempt to pretend there is a high demand from women.  I think the Chicks with Dicks phenomenon is likely near as dammit 100% male. 

I include this quote just to note that the theme of Lesbians changing their orientation is recurrent. 

FDDBA9AF-3FA1-48F8-BF56-07143C0F39D3

Cultural appropriation: Lesbians

Here the BPS gives the word “lesbian” to males, who present as male, but describe themselves as “lesbian”. To all those people denying this is actually happening. Here is yet more confirmation.

586F68A8-72CC-419F-A5CC-24507517F026

The BPS also endorse the idea that sexuality is fluid.  While there are complex debates around whether sexuality is innate and unchanging one of the key victories in Gay Rights movement was that their sexuality was fixed and therefore Conversion Therapy should not be attempted, and moreover, it won’t work.  However this doesn’t chime with the idea that a Lesbian can express their sexuality with a male-bodied “lesbian”.  Is this why the idea of a fluid sexuality has gained ground in advocates of Queer Theory?  

6EE7817A-D21F-4EE9-A339-DBE08D1629D6

Gender Performance. 

Here the BPS explains that an absence of socialisation related to your preferred gender may mean that trans people have difficulty with their “gender performance”. That may explain the lingering male socialisation that generates so many woman-identified people threatening women with their male genitalia. Very interesting use of the word “performance” here. Performative femininity is something feminists have sought to resist and reject illustrating, once again, that it runs counter to women’s liberation for our sex to be reduced to simply an “identity”.

920813FD-76E7-4DCA-8D8C-EE74BD562CDA

I would love to see some research about the long term mental health impact of pretending to be something you are not. The Imposter Syndrome must be debilitating and I cannot imagine it is psychologically healthy.

Therapy or Social Engineering?

Another interesting observation below. Yes! There are people who are fine with all sorts of personal self-expression and not conforming to expected sex stereotypes should be supported. The next sentence is fascinating. Ideologues insist that young people should be encouraged in this, regardless of personal cost, because it aids the “deconstitution of the gender binary”. That doesn’t read like a careful, therapeutic approach to clients with “Gender Dysphoria”. It reads as an appeal to harness them as activists for a wider project of social engineering. Is that even ethical?

D23C283E-8148-41CF-8E97-3091860DA10C

Medical Interventions for Gender Confusion.

The quote below contains an important acknowledgment of research which highlights that the majority of “gender atypical” youth will be young gay males/lesbians. It also stresses the it is “imperative irreversible medical decisions should not be made“. This document is therefore not reflective of a purely affirmative model and thus gives contradictory messages. It is also interesting this comment survived the edit , though the BPS go on to advocate stopping puberty and early surgery. How clinicians were supposed to navigate these mixed messages is a mystery to me.

912097E5-561F-4941-BEF7-073CD2B72491

The document also raises some concerns which are echoed by those of us concerned about the impact of Gender Identity ideology on gay males and Lesbians. Here Clinicians are warned about the cultural context surrounding sex stereotypes. They raise the issue of father’s who may be concerned that they have a “sissy” for a son, we could call this homophobia. Again they also highlight that the majority of pre-pubertal children desist and later identify as gay or bisexual. I will be very surprised if this survives the BPS guidelines for 2019.

Furthermore it goes on to acknowledge the treatment for Gender Identity Disorder (previous name for Gender Dysphoria) is “experimental”. Note that by 2011 GIDS had already begun blocking puberty for children as young as 10. A decade later they still have not published the research outcomes from that “Study” ,despite being obliged to do so. I use inverted commas here because I am not the only one who feels this “study” was a pretext for embarking on the early medicalisation of gender confused kids/teens. We are starting to see some of the fall-out from this approach in the emerging phenomena of de-transitioners.

5C680605-3EFB-452C-874E-E3C780344112

Another series of startling admissions echo the experience of parents dealing with our Gender Dysphoric kids/teens. Clinicians are warned that an obsession with changing sex may arise due to schizophrenia or Asperger’s syndrome. They also warn about the role of the internet in fostering a trans-identity. Furthermoe they caution people of the consquences of advising people who you do not really “know”. Anyone who has visited the Trans related subreddits will see that this sort of “coaching” is a regular feature of that forum.

Even more worrying is the growth of on-line Gender Identity services who are facilitating the dispensing of hormone treatment. These  operate on the “informed Consent” model which basically hands the treatment decisions to their “clients”. Basically these practioners discourage any gatekeeping (caution) and  agree that a “Trans” person knows their gender identity best. It is therefore the role of the clinician to “affirm” not “question ” a client’s Gender dentity. The caution expressed below seems to have all but disappeared in modern practice.

Below they highlight that trans individuals may “embellish or limit personal history information in order to obtain desired treatments”.  Parents are well aware that our offspring re-invent the past and, in my opinion, this is one reason why we are demonised and sidelined.  When our offspring claim to have always felt like the opposite sex we are the people who can offer a counter-narrative based on facts. 

3DA4A27E-1B95-4776-9224-95C730A783BE

Here they present a list of the surgeries that may be on the list to enable people to “live as their authentic self”.

Next up: THE 2019 guidance and some dissenting voices from within the BPS membership. 

If you are able to support my work please do so. I am unwaged and all my content is open.

Investigating the march of Gender Identity Ideology. The impact on Women’s rights and the cost paid by our Gay offspring & children on the Autistic spectrum.

5.00 £

British Psychological Society 2

Featured

For the purposes of this blog I am interested in how the British Psychological Society (BPS) came to draft the Memorandum Of Understanding (MOU) outlawing the practice of Conversion Therapy. I have revisited their pronouncements from 2012 to trace what led up to the BPS stance. First I looked at the summary document which doesn’t give much away. You can read this here: 👇

BPS Positions Statement on Therapies Attempting to Change Sexual Orientation (2013)

This document is dated  December 2012 and it’s title is reassuring.  Clear statement that the BPS is concerned with Sexual Orientation. No conflation of sexual orientation with Gender Identity. 

1DDFF40C-6F85-432B-AECA-77912234FDF8

Indeed the short document is focussed almost entirely on opposing conversion (sometimes referred to, sinisterly, as “reparative”) therapies relating to sexual orientation. Only this one sentence references “Gender Identities”. 

90EFFCEA-3E53-4613-AFD2-4E4B1B67582D

If I had read only this position statement I would have assumed the BPS were still talking about Gay Conversion Therapy. If I was a stealth advocate of Gender Identity Ideology the above quote provides enough “plausible deniability” against accusations of duplicity. The authors can argue they referenced gender/identities in the summary document. Anyone not versed in Trans rhetoric, (who was in 2012?) would not have picked up the reference to “gender” and “identities” or the wider implications. I wonder how many BPS members read the full document to which they refer?

The authors allude to a 100 page guidance which sets out, in detail, the expected treatment guidelines that Therapists are expected to follow. If you didn’t go on to read this document you would be unaware of what you were actually signing up to…

I will cover the above document, in detail, in my next blog. First I want to have a look at the people, publicly, involved in producing the BPS position statement. If I have learned anything, from my deep dives into Transgender Ideology, it is that the same names recur. It is chilling because a tiny minority of activists have managed an astonishing level of cognitive and legal/policy capture.

Here are the named contributors to the BPS position statement.

Dr Lyndsey Moon (Chair)

Here is a profile of Dr Moon which makes it clear their interest in Queer Theory pre-dates this position statement by many years. https://www.beeleaf.com/beeleaf-team/igi-lyndsey-moon/

Here Dr Lydsey is referenced in relation to a meeting with the Government Equality Office, in July 2019. Note their attendance was by invitation of the GEO.

Below is the website which details the meeting with the GEO and also introduces another group : Psychotherapists and Counsellors for Social Responsibility (PCSR). Well worth reading this because they report that they felt “heard” and clearly have on-going contact with senior figures within the Government Equality Office.

https://www.pcsr.org.uk/resources/13

The link above also provides full details of the LGBT Advisory Panel to the GEO. Note the name of Dr Michael Brady LGBT advisor. The panel of LGBT advisors which includes Ruth Hunt (then CEO of Stonewall), Paul Dillane of the Kaleidescope Trust and Paul Martin of Consortium. This LGBT panel was expanded in membership later and included James Morton of Scottish Trans Alliance. The LGBT Advisory panel, to the GEO, is also crying out for a full analysis of it’s compositon and its activities.

By August 2020 Dr Moon appears to have a multiple identity as Dr Igi/Lyndsey Moon. Here she/he/they (who knows?) speaks fluent Gender Identity speak encompassing the gender fluid, the non-binary and their right to equal treatment (fair enough). The group also campaign for these identited to be protected from “conversion” therapy. Most people are aware of the shameful history of Conversion attempts of homosexuals. The literature on conversion attempts of the “Gender Fluid” and “non-binary” community is something with which I am much less familiar.

Dr Moon is also now the chair of this organisation to campaign against conversion therapy:

Dr H. Eli Joubert

Dr Joubert is another author who works in the field of Gender Dysphoria/Transsexualism.  He provides diagnostic services to enable access to HRT (cross sex hormones) and surgeries. He also provides documentation to support applications for a Gender Recognition Certificate.  He has also worked with Transgender prisoners. He is deeply entrenched in the Gender Medico-Industrial Complex. 

77F9C7C0-F5C0-4FED-94E3-C7F637837ED3

Dr Claudio Pestano 

Dr Pestano works in the field of Gender Dysphoria though his main focus seems to be  Aspergers/Autism. 4A3B294D-1CF1-49ED-891B-A497D9FA6613

Estimates of the percentage of referrals to Gender Identity Clinics, with a diagnosis of Autism are up to 30%.  Females with autism are less likely to have a diagnosis so the prevalence of diagnosed females, in Gender Identity Referrals, should raise alarm bells.   Dr Postano may very well be aware of this and his therapy may be perfectly appropriate.  I would, however, like to see more experts on autism raising some concern about why so many autistic kids are identifying as “transgender”. 

Dr Joanna Semlyen

You can watch Dr Joanna Semlyen and Dr Moon speaking to parliament on LBGT mental health in May 2019.  In it you will find references to Bridging hormones which is the practice of providing cross-sex hormones to those on the waiting list for Gender Identity Clinics.  Lots of references to hetero-normative, different identities, non-binary, gender fluid etc.  Dr Semlyen makes a plea for the inclusion of gender identity and sexual orientation in databases to make LGBTQ+ people feel confident in  their acceptance.  It’s not clear if Dr Semlyen advocates for sex to be replaced with “gender identity” but we now know this is already happening. The other panel member says acceptance is not enough.  People with different identities should not be simply accepted they should be celebrated.  One of the contributors is quoted saying the following: LGBTQ identities should be very highly valued, not just equal, not just part of the mainstream, but much more valued”.  It’s almost as if they have no concerns that they may be fuelling a backlash against the communities they purport to serve. 

C19245B1-A3D8-4ED8-BF18-FEED4680F064

You can watch this session below and read the full transcript of the evidence. All via Hansard. 

Oral Evidence

Or read the transcript Oral evidence – Health and social care and LGBT communities – 15 May 2019

Notice that Sarah Champion makes every effort to make sure the topic of trans suicides comes up.  Suicide Ideation / attempts crops up frequently in this “debate” using statistics which have been debunked many times. I mention this because Sarah Champion has been challenged , my myself and others, due to  her use of suicide statistics which inflate the risk to transgender teens.  I wish politicians would do some due diligence and pay attention to Samaritan’s guidance on responsible coverage of suicide risk.  I cover this here: Suicide in the Trans Community

Gay/Gender Identity:  Conversion Therapy  

Most people will, instinctively, wish to see Gay Conversion Therapy banned. Lobby groups know this so they are using stealth tactics to bolt on “Gender Identity ” to a popular cause. As I have argued, consistently, this legitimises the new Woke Gay Conversion Therapy. Activists argue that failing to adhere to sex stereotypes may mean you are born in the wrong body. Non-adherence to sex stereotypes is common, especially in Gay males and Lesbians. One from the rise outcome of Gender Identity Ideology is Lesbians and Gay males are, once again, hearing “born wrong” narratives dressed up in a rainbow costume.

This forced teaming, of the T ,with the LGB, has proved a disaster for homosexuals. in so many ways. Gender Identity Ideology threatens to undo the many victories of Gay Right’s activists In The Denton’s Document, Lobbyists for Gender Identity legislation are encouraged to latch onto popular legislation to sneak in further entrenchment of Gender Identity Ideology. Gay Conversion Therapy bans, which include “gender identity“, are no exception. I will link my piece on the Denton’s document here, Everybody should read it, 👇

That Denton’s Document

In this blog I am simply looking at the BPS position statement. I will follow this up with the a look at detailed guidance to which we are signposted. It is over 100 pages long in this edition and this article gives you a good idea of the kind of content you can look forward to from the BPS……

https://quillette.com/2020/10/31/i-signed-up-to-study-sexual-health-what-i-got-was-gender-ideology-fetishism-and-porn/

To avoid transmission of the POMO virus please wear a Mask?

British Psychological Society 1

Featured

For the purposes of this blog I am interested in how the British Psychological Society (BPS) came to draft this Memorandum Of Understanding (MOU) outlawing the practice of Conversion Therapy. I imagine most people will, instinctively, see this as an unmitigated good but beware. As I have written in my blog below stealth tactics are in play. This is not just about Gay Conversion Therapy. it also includes “Gender Identity” which makes it a very different proposition. This is a tactic. See my post on The Activist’s play book below:

That Denton’s Document

Activists are encouraged to latch onto popular legislation to sneak in further entrenchment of Gender Identity Ideology. Gay Conversion Therapy bans, which include “gender identity“, are no exception.

Here I am simply looking at the MOU but I will follow up with blog on the BPS guidelines, referenced in this document. 👇

memorandum-of-understanding-v2-reva-jul19

First up a definition  👇 as provided, in the MOU, which you can read below

For regular readers you will know my concern is “affirming” a Gender Identity, at odds with your biological sex, may very well be a form of Gay Conversion Therapy. I cover this below.

The Woke Gay Conversion Therapy?

The BPS sets out its stance in this document. Sexual orientation is defined such that anyone whose “Gender Identity” is at odds with their biological sex is not excluded from the target of their sexual orientation. It paves the way for male lesbians and female gay men. It also includes asexual as a sexual orientation which is starting to become more prevalent in communications from the likes of Stonewall U.K. (For overseas readers Stonewall is a UK organisation which, historically, fought for Gay rights). The BPS also have signed up to the belief that sex isn’t binary despite the fact that we are a sexually dimorphic species. Sigh!

F8F22002-CA89-4D8D-ACE4-3886B08712C4

Next, clip below,  BPS members are told they   are not allowed to favour any Gender Identity over another.  The language is obfuscatory.  The BPS doesn’t support therapeutic approaches to reconcile  a child /youth to a Gender Identity that aligns with their biological sex.The BPS effectively supports only a Gender Identity at odds with biological sex.  How else will they disrupt the Gender Binary and queer social norms?  Queering society turns out to have meant straightening the Gays. Who knew?

It is my, unashamed, preference that my son reconciles to his sex and sexuality. In an ideal world our offspring will live a full life, in their sexed body, with whichever sex forms the basis of their attraction. This means they won’t depend on cross sex hormones, for the rest of their life, or face unnecessary surgical procedures.  This is the ideal outcoe and this should not be a controversial statement.  What other area would parents be called bigots for wanting their offspring to reconcile to a healthy body as a first line of “treatment”?   Or to be comfortable with their same sex orientation?  We are living in the upside down. 

Notice the quote, below, also includes the sentence includes both “Gender identity” and “Gender Expression”.  I have yet to see a satisfactory, definition that explains why these terms are deemed to describe distinct phenomenon. 

96118F7F-0FDC-487B-98B7-B7EA4588F3FD

45541565-5244-4EBE-9442-DBE45E8688B1

The MOU does state that it is permissible to access therapy to reconcile conflict about your sexuality, or gender. The question is how is this possible if therapists are too afraid to explore it?  This doesn’t square with the idea it is harmful to seek the path of least medicalisation. Being gay doesn’t set you on a lifelong dependence on #BigPharma it also doesn’t mean you are born wrong, and definitely not in the wrong body. The exemptions the BPS do emphatise, below,   are in respect of  exploratory work to enable “trans” patients to access hormones or other medical treatments.  Why no similiar exemption for patients who may be having trouble accepting their homosexuality?

AD78E792-F9C2-44E4-8B91-1E1C2AA64CA0

Next up I will look at the guidelines quoted below.  I have had a sneak preview of the latest ones and an earlier guide  from 2012.  In 2012 the summary guidance is scant on details. However both the 2012 guidance and the 2017 (updated 2019) are clearly driven by  the involvement of prominent Trans Activists / proponents of Queer Theory.  It appears to have taken less than a decade for the BPS to go full Gender Identity ideology compliant.   The details of the guidance will be on my next blog which lists the many familiar names who have corrupted the BPS. 

261874BD-39E2-4293-9DFA-2A21B294FA01

Here are a list of the signatories. I will just pick out a few.  Jay Stewart, from Gendered Intelligence jumped out: A keen proponents of Queer Theory /Gender Identity Ideology.  Gendered Intelligence are infamous for producing a guide to trans sex, for youth,  which contained this gem. 

7A306DF9-B4D6-435F-B835-C1573438AD7E

I could have sworn it was Gendered Intelligence which produced a guide, to terminology,  which claimed “vagina” for “transwomen”and relegated women’s vaginas to “front holes”.   I couldn’t find that clip but if anyone has it let me know and I will add it. 

The British Association for Counselling & Psychotherpy (BACP) also signed. The BACP regulate University courses in this area so Universities have to comply or they won’t have their courses accredited. The BACP  also published a document which seemed to have difficulty including working class women, from the North of England, in their definition of a female gender identity.  For more on this  look at the #TransNorthern on twitter.  We women, of the North, had a lot of fun with that one. 

More worryingly, one of the signatories was the Medical director of NHS England. .

0C47E7D6-94F4-414C-8D91-DC65CFB2B8AD

And here are the final signatures together with their supporters and it includes union members and the Royal College of Genderal oops General Practitioners.  FFF029EC-E9AF-4FA2-907A-8C4386A1CE56

Finally our old friends Stonewall. 👆.

07A6D84D-B4CA-4AD5-B5EB-3F2A05986D04

Has there ever beeen an organisation that has trashed its reputation more thoroughly, in less than a decade, than Stonewall UK?

Researching Gender Identity Ideology and its impact on Women and our Gay Youth. Support is always appreciated (I have no income) but I would be equally happy if you contributed to a relevant legal case, a crowdfunder for Lesbian and Gay News or Safe Schools Alliance

£10.00