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

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

Queering the NSPCC? FINAL

Featured

The National Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Children dates back well over a century.  It was granted a Royal Charter, by Queen Victoria, in 1895.  The NSPCC is the only UK charity which has been granted statutory powers under the Children Act 1989, allowing it to apply for care and supervision orders for children at risk.  Childline, the charity founded by Esther Rantzen, became part of the NSPCC in 2006.

After looking at the ChildLine Content on Porn;  I was moved to examine their other content.  I focussed specifically on LGBTQ+ content and you can find these blogs all headed Queering the NSPCC.

In summary the Lesbian content is extremely limited.  Where two females are included the word Lesbian seems to be verboten.  Even the Gay males, who do get more coverage, seem obliged to reference the fluidity of their sexual orientation, identify as Queer  but avoid any expression of an, exclusively, same sex orientation.

Here is a summary of their content and how much time it devotes to sexual orientation.  I have been very generous in assigning the label Lesbian to the two I cover here.  They are clearly female couples but do not mention the word Lesbian.   Two of the posts left me in doubt about the sexuality of the interviewees.  Asexual, we are told, covers 1% of the population and yet is given two YouTubes. Trans coverage is given 21% of the content and all the LGBTQ+ invariably foregrounds the T.   The content for Gay males is higher but many pay lip service to the idea of Gendered Attraction, as opposed to being confident in proclaiming their exclusive sexual attraction to biological men.

Here is a spreadsheet of all the content with some notes, where appropriate.  NSPCC Content

Below the NSPCC endorses controversial charity Mermaids which advocates for “Trans Kids”, campaigns for earlier medical intervention, and suggests children struggling with Gender Identity issues need to be safeguarded from parents.  Mermaids think any parent who fails to agree  their child is #BornInTheWrongBody is abusive and places their child in danger of suicide. They do this by referencing extremely dubious statistics. 👇  Suicide in the Trans Community

Do the NSPCC also agree with this characterisation of, parents of kids with Gender Dysphoria, as abusive if they dont’ medicalise?  Their content is replete with the notion that sex  is merely “assigned at birth” and they are confident signposting children to Mermaids.

2988B861-9203-4D9B-8B6A-FE36A51CC469

They are also meeting with Stonewall. Once a venerable advocate for Gay rights. Now in total thrall to the Trans Lobby. Peter Wanless is the head of the NSPCC and Gender Identity Ideology has been peddled to vulnerable kids on his watch. 👇

6223E297-234C-49CB-BD0E-D12A293D24F6

I also had a delve into any content about women’s rights and unearthed this content.  Even in content about women we are obliged to pay homage to the idea of Self-Identifying Women/Men. Abject nonsense about “people with periods”.

Queer Theory in Practice.

The NSPCC have also received some media coverage today for a Nude Family Swim which is an event at Waterworld in Stoke.  Apparently the NSPCC were involved in developing the Safeguarding policy.   I wish we lived in a world where childhood innocence was protected but it is naive to, implicity,  endorse activities such as these 👇

Archive link to the article https://archive.is/3oJcl

I doubt I would have been moved to look at the NSPCC were it not for the responses they issued to people raising concerns about some disturbing social media activity by one of their employees.  Full Story is below.

This story of James Making, a former employee,  of the NSPCC until he was eventually Let Go is illustrative of how far this charity has lost its way,  James  was responsible for the short-lived role of Munroe Bergdorf, a trans activist, at the NSPCC. He then became known for more notorious activities at his place of work.   This one story ought to have been a wake up call for the NSPCC but I fear they are unable to change course.  I include this woeful tale because it is indicative of how the adoption of Gender Identity Ideology and the obsession with LGBTQ+ has clouded the Charity’s judgement.  When you make any community into a modern day “Priest class”  your critical faculties become dimmed.

James Making & Munroe Bergdorf

I began to look at the NSPCC following an incident involving an employee who clearly stated his employer on his Social Media accounts. He then posted footage of himself masturbating, in leather fetish gear, at work.  Not content with this he added a clear statement that he was doing this at a Children’s Charity.  Clearly  this detail about the context was intended to  further  titillate  his audience.

8D8B96A1-274A-4366-9CB2-E0C30FFFDCEC

James was the NSPCC employee responsible for hiring a Transgender model/ activist as an advocate for the charity.  Munroe had previously lost other roles after previous social media activity came to light. L’oréal, The Labour Party & the BFI were three such roles. Once the NSPCC post was announced the public backlash began. Munroe presents a highly sexualised image of what they believe to be female presenting. Potentially more worrying were public invitations for troubled children to contact them directly. As many people pointed out this showed a naïveté about safeguarding children. The model had posed for playboy, and solicited messages from “transkids

The unsuitability of this role model is amply illustrated here 👇

2DC15279-9738-4E3E-95EE-9D61EB67FD95

Munroe also posted some invitations for children to contact them directly, via social media, in an ill-advised approach to #ChildSafeguarding.

C92FC45D-2593-4A04-B355-B93E679B2D3F

The NSPCC dispensed shed with Munroe’s services, not without a hint of denial about their role, despite having publicly announced it.9DC38320-6DF6-4796-909C-A024FC5CEE2A

Later they would issue a grovelling apology, to Munroe, for the manner of the sacking.

Here is the statement  👇

D0FFE026-9A72-45E8-B67E-B5625C67A6FB

When the masturbatory antics of Mr Making were revealed the NSPCC’s Immediate response, astonishingly, was to berate people for raising concerns! It also accused them displaying homophobia and attacking their staff. Other high profile Guardian writers joined in 👇

87401763-7D7A-423E-9E17-3ED263E94543

So let me reiterate. A man was posting, publicly, video of himself masturbating on the premises of a Charity, whose remit is to protect children. Observers had no means of determining his sexuality, His actions were raising  red flags all over the place.🚩

You can read more on this, by Jo Bartosch here

Here are a couple of clips from that article and one (censored) from the post made by Mr Making.

6B265DC5-AA09-4931-8077-AE975BADC465

The NSPCC remained silent for some time until it emerged that the employee had been sacked.

The  NSPCC openly proclaims  that it’s priority is their  LGBTQ credentials.  My reading of their content shows they are committed to the Q at the expense of the rights of people who fought to gain legal protections for their sexual orientation. 5772232A-D7CD-451C-8453-76F7387F46EF

Lesbians?  Not so much. 

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

Queering the NSPCC? Part 10: Heteronormativity

Featured

The National Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Children dates back well over a century.  It was granted a Royal Charter, by Queen Victoria, in 1895.  The NSPCC is the only UK charity which has been granted statutory powers under the Children Act 1989, allowing it to apply for care and supervision orders for children at risk.  Childline, the charity founded by Esther Rantzen, became part of the NSPCC in 2006.

What does Heteronormativity & Heterosexuality mean?

This episode features an interview with Calum McSwiggan who we met earlier in Queering the NSPCC? Part Three.   

476657CC-8114-4748-A0D7-B3B0C2C97B6F

Calum is a Gay male, here he is in conversation with Beckii, a young woman whose sexuality is not made explicity.  Here they team up to  teach us the meaning of “heteronormativity” and “heterosexual”.  

You can watch it Here

You can read a transcript here: Challenging Heteronormativity Child Line

First off.  Its not a bad idea to challenge assumptions that *everybody* is heterosexual.  There is every chance a kid who doesn’t perform sex sterotypical behaviours is not heterosexual.  I don’t propose to expound on whether this is hard-wired, #BornThisWay, or nurture. It is, however, one of the earliest signs a kid  will grow up Gay. This early sign allows parent’s, like me, to signal acceptance in a number of ways.  For me, I always talked about futher relationships in terms of “she” or “he” so  my son knew this was perfectly acceptable and supported by his parents.  So, on the face of it, challenging heteronormativity is no bad thing. FAE142C7-A39A-499F-97EB-EFE351DB8958

The conversation explores the impact of  expectations of heterosexuality on kids who have a sense they are different /  don’t conform to gendered expectations for their sex.  One of the main concerns with this topic is the conflation of  early signs of future homosexuality with being “trans”.  The interviewer  does this early on with the statement below. Here an effeminate boy,  or a masculine female, immediately calls into question, not just their sexuality, but their sex/trans status.  It is this way of thinking that can have a disastrous impact on the gay community.  What could be more “heteronormative” than equating same sex orientation with the idea that you may just be “trans”.  If an effeminate boy, attracted to males,  is really a woman does that not make him straight?  Is this not the ultimate in elevating the new version of heterosexual as the “norm”?4F4C37FE-E4DE-4A4E-92B0-5DD4154DC28F

 Calum continues the theme. “We’re brought up in a society where you are kind of expected to be cisgender, you are expected to be heterosexual”.  What he fails to see is that Gender Identity ideology  puts a massive question mark over the sex of, gender non-conforming, Gay males and Lesbians. Even  though we know this behaviour is one of the earliest clues  someone may grow up homosexual, we are offering the alternative narrative they may be #BornWrong.  How is that progress?

I have written about this many times here is one piece  The Woke Gay Conversion Therapy?

I have also written about a project funded by the Government Equality Office which illustrates how this approach is being used in Primary Schools. That Equaliteach Project

Another common theme, on my blog, is the impact on child safeguarding.  Anyone following my work will know I have a Gay son who also has Gender Identity issues.  As a school boy he did not use girls spaces. (He still doesn’t).  His circle of friends was wholly female.  When sleepovers became a feature, of these friendships,  he was excluded.  His exclusion was the parents prerogative. It was never driven by unkindness. They had daughters and they did not know my son. We both respected the parent’s decisions.  He was included in one sleepover and he was delighted. The parents knew him and it was their decision.  I am not going to lie, I secretly had a bit of a cry when he was invited.  However an individual invitation should not translate into blanket inclusion. It  should not be a default expectation. (Fun fact. He was 11 and those, sugar and spice, girls sent him home with manually pierced ears!) 

Anyway, I digress, Gemma here doesn’t get #ChildSafeguarding and, by extension, neither do #ChildLine .  This is not about heteronormativity it’s about girls’ rights to set boundaries and not to be shamed about necessary exclusions.  👇D38104D1-0537-4C00-9AAF-D524C5C023C1

Again one of the central difficulties is that we are telling people that you can neither tell anyone’s sexuality or gender by the way they present themselves.  This is problematic for all sorts of reasons, and not true, wholly, in either case. Gaydar is a thing and thank goodness it is for the dating ability of Gay Males and Lesbians.  Detecting biological sex is also hard-wired and doesn’t change because of the massive strides in surgical mimicry. 
0863C41B-D209-40EF-915F-CD1B048E13A4
 
I watched two gay men discussing this on Arty Morty’s youtube.  Duncan, a gay man, tells a tale about identifying the one other gay man in a nightclub before either of them were out.  Calum here is being disingenuous. 
 
Closely followed by Gemma who extends this to deny we have any ability to correctly “gender” people.  Er. We can sex them though!B9E652E0-DC02-4CF5-B1D9-AEA4C8E80B53
 
This is duplicitous stuff.  We don’t just detect sex for mating purposes. Women detect males because it has a huge impact on how we manage our safety in certain settings.  This ideology tells us a) that  it is bigotry to recognise biological reality b) tells us we have to accept bearded males as females and even lesbians!  Cue Alex Drummond.
Stonewall Ambassador! 👇

C0DD8BAB-2DAA-458F-B19F-056F4A548428

Alex has delivered school talks about being a Lesbian!  This is Gaslighting!

I too would like to see some understanding of different sexualities and family structures.  The fact remains that most people live in heterosexual couples. It cannot be beyond our wit to make sure that children know there are different family structures. Not all of the children will end up in heterosexual relationships. I have no objection to this being signalled, even in primary school. This would allow  chidren who may already have pre-sexual, innocent crushes, on the same sex, feel “normal”.  We don’t have to wage a culture war on heterosexual norms just because heterosexual relationships are the majority. 

You will not achieve acceptance for one sexuality if you attack another’s as somehow “invalid”.   It really isn’t a good tactic.   The sex denialism in Gender Identity Ideology is unmoored from biological reality and sexual desire.  There is a conflict with the protection of women’s rights to sex segregated spaces and the right to be exclusively same sex attracted.   The sooner politicians and Gay Rights Activists wake up to this the better.

We risk reversing progress made over 30 years! 

 
 

Donate

If you want to support my work here is my paypal. Please only do so if you can afford. Any amount will help. tishnaught@me.com

£3.00

Queering the NSPCC? Part 9: Asexuality

Featured

The National Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Children dates back well over a century.  It was granted a Royal Charter, by Queen Victoria, in 1895.  The NSPCC is the only UK charity which has been granted statutory powers under the Children Act 1989, allowing it to apply for care and supervision orders for children at risk.  Childline, the charity founded by Esther Rantzen, became part of the NSPCC in 2006.

Coming out as Asexual! 

The NSPCC/ChildLine content manages to have two young women who come out as Asexuals.   Their content seems to have no space for Lesbians/Gay males unless a) they don’t mention the word Lesbian b) they identify as Queer and acknowledge the fluidity of sexual attraction.  Yet this niche identity (asexual)  is given two out of the 24 videos on  LGBTQ+ content. 

Here is a transcript which covers both videos: Asexuality on Childline Yasmin and Amelia

You can watch them  here: Yasmin  and Amelia here. 

Yasmin talks us through the trauma of multiple exits from the closet and the need to educate the bemused recipients of the asexual  announcements.  People have a lot of controversial opinions about Yasmin’s experience and seem a tad confused.   I am not sure what Yasmin has, or has not, done to generate this confusion.  Apparently ChildLine seem to think this is a pressing issue to cover so they have helpfully signposted more content on asexuality to clear up any confusion. B3969325-E344-49AB-BA01-42AA750A4C4A

Amelia tells us that she also got confused after all the interrogation,  oops reasonable questions, that came her way.  This is the logical conclusion of the Queer take-over of, once venerable, Gay Rights organisations.  Pretty much everyone fits under the  Queer umbrella these days. These new identities are an insult to the very real fight to get legal protections for Sexual orientation.EB5A5874-5666-48B6-9B43-68C0CEF57DA7  

Another recurrent feature of the ChildLine content is the reckless promotion of YouTube content.  Narcissists are ten a penny on YouTube. They make their money by attracting viewers, likes and sensational/ pseudo edgy content. For many of them this is their bread and butter and the content is carefully curated to stay relevant.   Not once, in all the LGBTQ+ content, on the ChildLine YouTube,  do they offer any words of caution about the content providers they profile.  It is reckless to use Social Media Influencers in this way.  Their raison d’etre is not Child Safeguarding, it’s maintaining audience, influence  and revenue. This is not compatible with what SHOULD be the aims of ChildLine/NSPCC. 

Yasmin’s contribution is, however, nothing compared to the self-absorbed contribution from Amelia. Adolescents, or immature adults, setting themselves up as self-appointed experts, are simply not equipped to give good advice to children /teens.  Amelia is also asexual.  Below is a long excerpt to give you an idea of the word salad being dished out to gullible children.  What a load of (Judith) Butler Bollox. 👇👇

Obfuscation masquerading as Education!

So, asexuality like a lot of things to do with gender and sexuality, is something of a spectrum. Asexual is an identity on it’s own, but it’s also an umbrella term or, erm, like  a spectrum term for a wider group who have similar experiences. There’s demisexuality and grey-asexuality or greysexuality, and these are both identities that fall under  the asexual umbrella. Demisexuality is somebody who doesn’t experience sexual attraction until there’s a strong emotional bond formed. And this isn’t the same thing as like waiting till marriage or something. It’s about not feeling sexual attraction until you are entirely comfortable with someone.”

I predict a great career in Academia for Amelia. Watch out Sally Hines! The next generation is snapping at your heels.

Here is Amelia on Grey-sexuality. I am almost too bored to attempt to define grey-sexuality/grey-asexuality. Seems some people, who fall under the “ACE” umbrella, experience little or no sexuality. Even when they do experience it they may not be able to summon the energy/ inclination to act up on it. This might describe every mum with a new baby / toddler but we just called it “knackered” .

In another revealing quote Amelia seems unable/unwilling to give an honest reflection on what underpins SEXual attraction. In the world of multiple “Gender Identities” , it is an unpardonable offence to acknowledge biological sex. Here is Amelia on sexual attraction 👇Can’t say I have ever fallen in love with a voice but I am sure there is a sexual identity, to cover this, on its way. We could nominate Louis Armstrong for this one.

Lest you confuse asexuality, with people not having sex, Amelia is careful to explain that some asexual people do have relationships and sexual relationships, presumably in an asexual way. Fair play to anyone who can sustain a libido faced with this level of self-absorption!
Do not let our legislators accept this absolutely incoherent ideology as a basis for law.

Fuck The Wokerati; The Surrendered Polyamorous; The Don’t Fuck Me Pumps wearing; The Educate Yourself crowd have destroyed any joy in sexuality. Of any orientation or none.

Donate

If you want to support my work here is my paypal. Please only do so if you can afford. Any amount will help. tishnaught@me.com

£3.00

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

Featured

The National Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Children dates back well over a century.  It was granted a Royal Charter, by Queen Victoria, in 1895.  The NSPCC is the only UK charity which has been granted statutory powers under the Children Act 1989, allowing it to apply for care and supervision orders for children at risk.  Childline, the charity founded by Esther Rantzen, became part of the NSPCC in 2006.

Steph on Sexuality and Gender Identity. 

This is a companion piece to my previous blog on content by ChildLine. I was curious to look at what content kids would encounter if they followed Steph on their main account.  You can read the previous blog, on Steph here.   

For those of us with  children, caught up in this, it is really important to understand the evolution of this ideology and how it has been fostered in our young.   ChildLine, as it turns out, is relentless in peddling Gender Ideology, under the badge of LGBTQ+ content.  Our same sex attracted youth are therefore getting signposted to Transgender content, relentlessly,  as I hope I have shown in this series on the NSPCC. 

Steph has been given a public platform to explain their experience of being Transgender. I have expressed my misgivings about ChildLine using Social Media influencers in this way. They  may be able to control the content on their channel (which is,  in my view, bad enough) but where is the  due diligence on content only be a few clicks away?  Curious or confused children/teens will explore the content of the contributors. 

This is a transcript; which is based on various vidoes on Steph’s YouTube channel: Steph Kyriacou discusses sexuality

This is a public figure, by virtue of the NSPCC/ChildLine connection, and their own social media presence.  It is important that people are able to examine the thought processes underpinning Gender Identity Ideology.  Put crudely this is the idea some people are #BornInTheWrongBody. I regard this generation of Social Media advocates as victims of the same ideology using them as mouth pieces.  I have nothing but compassion for the young women, and men, caught up in this belief system.  However those in Senior roles, at the NSPCC, are entirely culpable for the, uncritical, dissemination of Gender Identity Ideology, to vulnerable children/teens. 

Am I bisexual? 

First up are some quotes from this YouTube video from August 2019. Am I bisexual? 

In this post, Steph acknowledges a struggle to accept their same sex attraction when they identified as a Lesbian.  Now, a post Testosterone, post double mastectomy, self-identified man, they find themselves also attracted to “men” and struggling to come out.  

So, we have a clear acknowledgment they struggled to accept their same sex attraction. There is a rather moving post about how their, Greek Orthodox, grandparents accepted them coming out as a Transgender man. Yet no parallel “coming out” story, as a Lesbian, to relatives,

A later clip from that same video explains that Steph is now struggling to accept their attraction to “men”. They made this announcement on Bi-Visibility Day. Multiple “coming outs” are a feature of many of the young Social Influencers who’s content seems mainly driven adopting new “identities”. or Sexualities.

Trans Firsts!

Here is some of Steph’s content, from September 2018, on Trans Firsts: https://youtu.be/7v6E1gkVFtU

Influenced by YouTube content, Steph went ahead and bought their first binder. In secret. Without telling another soul. Bearing in mind that the NSPCC is promoting this YouTuber and it only took me a couple of clips to access all Steph’s on line content. Other low points are a product review for “packers” i.e. a prosthetic penis which, they advise their younger viewers, are available from Sex Shops. Below is another common occurrence. The YouTubers often reference other prominent “trans guys” and how much influence they had on their own “journey”.

Dating as a Trans Guy!

Next up, also from September 2018, is a post on Dating as a Trans Guy: https://youtu.be/D0ezulmqhvg

Here are some quotes. I had to condense some of the comments but the original content is linked above so you can see I have not distorted the intent.

An unexpected development, as Steph explains, is the change to their, perceived, dating pool since coming out as a man.

I will return to the above interpretation in an earlier YouTube, by Steph.

Here Steph re-calibrates who is expected to be in their dating pool. Before identifying as a man heterosexual females were accepted as being off limits. Steph listed the multiple ways females are now identifying. Lesbians, Pan (sexual) girls, bi (sexual) girls, queer girls etc. However Steph always believed “straight” girls were off limits, until they were a “Man”.

Unlike the many male, often fully male-bodied, “Lesbians” ; who feel entitled to be in a Lesbian dating pool, Steph, now embraces? accepts? being excluded by females who are attracted to females.

This would almost be a refreshing change, if Trans-Identified males accepted their exclusion from Lesbian dating pools. What is absolutely heart-breaking is a same sex attracted female doing a reverse #CottonCeiling and prioritising their gender identity over their sex, and sexual attraction.

Steph, in this video, has a revelation about the new inclusion of straight girls in their dating pool. Its astonishing how dismissive this movement is about sexual orientation whether gay, lesbian or hetereosexual. The tone in which the “whatever, you do you, date whoever you want” has a, not so subtle, under-current of disdain for the bigotted, dick loving, straight girls.

Guess what Steph? You don’t get to decide who includes you in their dating pools. You might well find yourself excluded from Lesbian dating preferences. They love women and you are in flight from your sex and, seemingly, your sexual orientation. Personally I would exclude any male who remains heterosexual but wishes to identify as a woman. I don’t want anyone in flight from their sex in my sex life! Or anyone who fetishises my own sex, but that’s a different story.

Drunk Chat : Two Trans Guys!

Next up is from March 2017. https://youtu.be/aF-PCVqUV68 Steph and another “trans guy” are having a bit of a drunk chat about some of their social experiences and being mis-identified. I assume the intermittent burping is based on an assumption that this is what boys do? (I mean, they might but it looks a little bit performative to me…) . This video explicity tells you that you can try to teach a “Cis-Person “the right way of thinking”. Yes they really did say this. If the Cis-Person doesn’t learn and respect your identity then, apparently, you can tell them to Fuck Off! I don’t think there is any self-awareness that redefining the rest of the population as “Cis” is hardly a marker of respect for who we are….Just ARE. Not something we identify as….

This was what triggered the backlash against the Cis Community.. Somebody mistook them for Lesbians and Women. Oh The HORROR!

Coming Out via a Revolving Door!

Next up is from January 2017 and is a retrospective review of Steph’s , multiple, coming out stories. https://youtu.be/HZLKBjxzkB8

Steph had crushes on girls but did not really understand this was what they were. At age 16 they started to get asked questions from their friends about their sexuality. Friends began asking them if they were “bisexual” . Steph, at this point, is adamant that they were in fact straight. This was a very emphatic statement no doubt reflective of the lack of acceptance, in her school that Steph highlights.

Here Steph acknowledges her struggle to accept her Lesbian sexuality at age 16. This is still such a difficult time for young people; who can be aware of being different long before understanding their sexual orientation. While Stonewall are busy, chasing the Trans Dollar, they are ignoring the homophobia, which never went away. It is still incredibly difficult to come to terms with same sex attraction. Those of us with gay offspring know this. We would have welcomed better sex education in school to foster acceptance of different sexual orientations. However this opportunity has been squandered because of the nefarious inclusion of “Gender Identity Ideology”. The new sex education is actively harmful for our gay youth. I would go to prison before I would accept the compulsory indoctrination of our kids in Queer Theory. Here is some research on the negative impact of homophobia on Gender Identity.

Homophobic Bullying & Gender Identity

As you can see above. Steph followed a familiar path in first identifying as Bisexual and then finally acknowledging their exclusive sexual attraction to females. HALLELULAH!

It did not last long, sadly. Steph gives us a detailed, if somewhat convoluted, explanation about ditching the label Gay Woman to identify as non-binary. This was a stepping stone to identifying as Queer; because if you don’t identify with either sex how can you be homosexual?

Next up in the mulitple identity disorders, Steph finally identifies as a Trans Man.

As Steph says, they have come out multiple times over the period of six years. The final irony is, in order to embrace their same sex orientation, they identify as a man attracted to other men. It turns out this includes transmen. Hey presto. You can identify as a gay man, keep your queer label and choose someone from the same sex as your partner. Turns out this is exactly what Steph did. Acknowledged their attraction to male, met a boy they liked. Boy then became their boyfriend. I had a look and the new boyfriend was another YouTuber, Nate, who is also a trans man.

We are through the looking glass.

Donate

If you want to support my work here is my paypal. Please only do so if you can afford. Any amount will help. tishnaught@me.com

£3.00