PETER TATCHELL

Featured

First of all kudos to GB News for tackling the issue of Gender Identity Ideology and having a, desperately needed, public debate. In this programme the perspectives of a Trans-Identified male, a Women’s rights campaigner (Kellie-Jay Keen-Minshall A.K.A Posey Parker), Beverley Jackson (LGB Alliance), Gary Powell (Gay man) and Peter Tatchell (Human Rights campaigner) were interviewed. The U.K Charity, Stonewall, were invited to participate but, to no great surprise, declined to participate.

Today I want to unpack the contribution of Peter Tatchell. You can watch his contribution below.

Peter Tatchell : Gender Debate

Transcript here:

PETER TATCHELL GB NEWS

Peter Tatchell is a, self-styled, Human Rights campaigner, best known for his Gay Rights Activism. His more high profile arrest in Putin’s Russia for protesting against draconian, anti-gay legislation garnered headlines across the world. He also known, especially in Zimbabwe, for attempting a citizens arrest of Robert Mugabe. Latterly, he is better known, in some circles, for situating himself at the centre of conflict between Trans rights & the rights of Women. He has also attracted criticism from Lesbians and Gay males for his stance on “trans-rights” and for ignoring the impact on homosexuals.

Peter seems quite keen to speak on this issue. Since so many Trans Lobby groups, refuse to debate the issues it is, perhaps, unsurprising that his views were sought. What is less clear are his motives. Why is he inserting himself in the middle of such a controversial topic? He is, however, especially keen to dispel any notion that he has anything to gain.

A2E62B4F-548B-4F01-B0DD-8C9408EE118D

Perhaps it is an elaborate penance for a letter he signed, defending free speech, on the controversial topic of Trans Rights? This resulted in, by his own account, the worst abuse he has had in decades of campaigning: Article below 👇

Peter Tatchell and the Trans Backlash

Perhaps he is driven by an ideological commitment to disrupting /queering social norms? Whatever the reason he does seem overly invested in an issue which is unlikely to impact him, personally.

Tatchell is keen neutralise criticism that he is elevating his voice above trans-people. It is noteworthy he does not show a similar concern about speaking over women. This latest intervention comes after he withdrew from a debate, with Kathleen Stock, on this very topic. Trans activists were vocal in their condemnation of him for agreeing to debate Professor Stock. They did not want him lending any credibility to Kathleen’s (quite moderate) stance on this issue. Many women were also unhappy about debating the issue, specifically with Tatchell, but his withdrawal from the debate was driven by Trans Activists, not the pesky women folk. 👇

43C59D11-EF4D-437B-8108-98992CEA7327

Alex, the interviewer, opens the debate with two questions. Both relate to the practical implications of biological sex denialism; it’s impact on women’s privacy and the medicalisation of children who display “Gender” non-conforming (GNC) behaviour. I would describe being GNC as a perceived failure to perform sex stereotypes. He doesn’t respond to the question about medical interventions on children.

[Both proto-gay males and lesbians can present,early, with atypical expressions of femininity/masculinity, sadly that issue was not explored in this segment. This was a shame because I would like to see Tatchell oppose the Gay Conversion Therapy on his doorstep but he probably knows the headlines would not be as good].

Tatchell opens with a (nervous?) statement about the capacity in which he is speaking. He is, emphatically, not there to speak on behalf of the trans community. He is there as a Human Rights campaigner to speak up for the rights of both women and transwomen. By which, he means, for the rights of males to be included in the category of women.

He demonstrates his neutrality, beautifully, by directing his ire at the previous speaker, a woman. Kellie-Jay, made it abundantly clear that the category of woman is based on SEX not Gender Identity. Tatchell used the, common, tactic of associating women, defending the colonisation of our existence, with homophobia. He also accused Kellie-Jay of whipping up hysteria about the dangers posed by “transwomen”.

Firstly, Gay men did not demand to be re-categorised as “women” and granted access to spaces where women are undressing, or merely associating, in a female only space. The legal recognition of same sex attraction had ZERO impact on the protected characterstic SEX.

Secondly he has no data to suggest males, who identify as transwomen, present a lower risk to women than other males. It is perfectly possible this category houses more predatory males because it includes those with the paraphilia “autogynephilia”. Also because of the queering of the boundaries between males and females we are being asked to accept the notion that some women have a penis . He is defending an ideology which promotes the idea of be-penised women and that a Lady Dick can be distinguished from the average penis. This kind of Phallus in Wonderland, magical thinking, sadly, was not exposed in this interview. I suspect the interviewer may be unfamiliar with the more radical claims of the Gender Identity Ideologues. Or, she may believe the general public are not quite ready to deal with the more outlandish claims. Sadly these beliefs are gaining traction among the political and Chattering Classes.

The various segments were not done in a format that allowed a right of reply so Kellie-Jay was not able to respond to the claims, made above. I wonder if Tatchell knows he is echoing the #NotAllMen phallusy of Men’s Rights Activists? Women exclude males, as a SEX class, because we know that some males are sexual predators. We should not, however, have to invoke fear of sexual violence to demand a right to exclude males. We should be legally protected because we have a right to bodily privacy. We should be, legally, able to congregate, in female only spaces, to discuss issues that affect our sex and only our sex. We don’t want to include males in these discussions.

6ADC687C-FCF1-464C-BF91-E0C514AD133D

The “handful” argument is belied by the increased media reports of sexual offenders gathering under the Trans Umbrella. When we finally get actual data monitoring this category of males, specifically, I fear it will confirm women’s worst fears. Presently, the prevalence of trans sex offenders is difficult to ascertain. It is only possible to get information by trawling through mis-leading media reports which consistently report Male crimes as if they were commissioned by Women.

Thanks IPSO! It is IPSO who produced the media guidelines which encourage the media to hide male crimes. Below is a short piece on these guidelines 👇

#TheseAreNotOurCrimes

Below is another diversionary tactic; the substitution of arguments about race to imply they are analogous to the issue of trans rights/women’s rights. By using this argument, Peter, tries to associate feminist arguments with racists. Instead of falling into this trap journalists should demand the interlocutor remain on topic. Argue the merits of your own case directly rather than implying that society needs to throw off the shackles of our backward Sexual Apartheid because it is bigotry akin to racism. For the avoidance of doubt, I don’t care what colour your dick is, for the purposes of women’s single sex spaces:

#AllDicksMatter

Tatchell then deploys another strategy. He claims the thing that women are complaining about has been going on for years and dismisses the “fuss” women are making. This is mendacious. The Transgender Lobby have just LOST (in the U.K) a very public campaign to allow any male to self-declare he is a woman. The new tactic is to claim males have been using women’s spaces for decades and we just didn’t notice! Sadly, for Peter, testosterone packs one hell of a punch and passing remains a pipe dream for most trans-id males, even those with resources to undergo significant surgery. Women are socialised to #BeKind but we do, in the main, recognise biological sex, evolution is such a Terf Bitch. Our safety depends on knowing if we are in a space with a male. Do we say anything thing? No! I refer you to #BeKind and our personal safety. We have all seen the Narcissistic rage of TRAs called “sir”, our lives depend on silence. Peter may interpret this as #Kindness but he is wrong to equate our silence with consent. It is more likely a result of #BeKind/ Doormat feminism or good old fashioned FEAR.

All the countries which have passed Self-ID legislation did so without holding a public debate. It was the public debate that did for this legislative change in the U.K. Grass roots resistance, led by a new group of women’s organisations, alerted ordinary women and we fought back. Women in Ireland, Malta and Argentina and the other countries were less prepared and this legislation was passed by stealth/ tacked onto popular causes. Professional women’s rights organisations were complicit and, consequently, women in these counties are only now waking up to the nightmare scenario the political classes have unleashed on women.

8070E478-5F08-4475-8DA4-954D57315B49

I have written extensively about the current process for obtaining a Gender Recognition Certificate (GRC) in the U.K. We have already given them to fully intact males, even where they have convictions for sexual assaults. For this reason I am not a defender of the status quo but allowing self-declaration would remove any gatekeeping. I would repeal the GRA and provide any protection needed, for refugees from masculinity, on some other basis. I would not allow males to identify into the legal category of woman, because it has been a disaster for women’s sex based rights.

Nobody can just declare they are “trans”

I assume Tatchell is here 👇 talking about the proposed changes to enact a self-id regime in the U.K, or the process in other countries. Here he is saying nobody can just “declare” they are trans by er, checks notes, outlining the process by which anyone can just declare they are trans!

Genius!

I do like his confidence. It seems such a shame to interrupt his confidence with some FACTS. Let me think of a few. Men in women’s sports, a man running a rape crisis centre and telling rape victims, afraid of ALL males, they need to unlearn their transphobia! Rapists in women’s prison, men taking a disproportionate number of places on the Women in Leadership (Jo Cocks) programme…I could go on.

Oh No! He said “Trans Women are Women”

Chanting a thought terminating cliche is beneath an intelligent man. I don’t doubt there are many issues faced by males who adopt the prescribed social norms for women. I don’t doubt they face sexual assault and harassment. Peter may not be aware that Hate Crime legislation doesn’t include the category of SEX, but does protect the category of “Transgender”. So, yes, he can produce the Hate Crime stats and all I have to counter it is a list of, not of the dead-named, but of the actual dead women. Misgendering is the least of our concerns.

EC6CA749-2769-4841-8B5C-46F7B51A18D3

This next bit is some forced-teaming from Tatchell. Come on girls, expend your energy being support humans to my undercover brothers, you know you want to! There is a concerted effort to invert the privilege hierarchy and place white males at the bottom of the pile, rhetorically speaking. To convince us black is white transperbole is deployed and, once again, he leverages the much discredited hate crime statistics. Not buying it.

FC1F0079-8D5D-4BDF-AF54-78FA0AB332DC

The interviewer interjects at this point to thank Tatchell for his cogent and rational arguments. I instinctively bristle at a man being called rational. Fairly or not, what I hear is, rational as opposed to the hysterical women. Another pet peeve is the way this “debate” is portrayed as #BadOnBothSides. It is a War on Women. We are defending ourselves from the neo-colonialism that is Trans Activism. It is playing “nice” that has allowed the #BeKind Brigade to be, well “brigaded”. Women have been trans-jacked and fighting back is what you do when your rights are under attack. Additionally, anyone paying attention would see the threats of violence, much of it sexual violence, comes from the male people. Women’s counter “attack” is, at its worst, refusing to use female pronouns or commenting on masculine features.

So let’s hear more from a man white-knighting for this most marginalised community. Fact free assertions about inner identity, parroting the authentic selves narrative, bla bla bla, hate crime, marginalised etc etc. Also Peter is a libertarian dontchaknow. If people want to be lifelong medical patients they should be allowed. (I don’t think many people have argued for an end to all surgeries, though I would argue it should be a last resort AND still not grant access to spaces set aside for another sex) Peter is tilting at windmills.

Breathtaking arrogant assertion is his next gambit. People (by which he means women) are making a mountain out of a molehill. Women objecting to having our sex redefined to admit any male are over-reacting! These hysterical women are projecting onto a vulnerable community. So vulnerable they have managed to roll back gains women made over a hundred years ago. So marginal they have captured, nearly, the entire political class.

Safeguarding 101

Also👇the central plank of safeguarding is the need set to a bar high enough to protect vulnerable groups from the BAD APPLES! That’s 101 of safeguarding, design your policy with a focus on the BAD APPLES! Because predators will migrate to where the loopholes exist and this ideology is dismantling safeguards left, right and centre.

A92782BC-9135-4162-BF05-40078717B29F

He can’t get any worse can he? Yep. He can. 😳. No we don’t ban cars Peter. We do make you pass a test, we make learners wear an L Plate, we fine people for motoring offences, we can ban you from driving and even imprison offenders. We also have social norms (and laws) against drink-driving. This is not the gotcha you think it is.

821D80C8-B3F3-44D3-851D-4F2C3B4C154D

I like to think Alex had enough at this point. Here the interview should end, and it nearly does. I don’t think it’s a shame the debate is polarised. When someone proposes to socially engineer society, based on a toxic ideology, there is no compromise to be had. We can’t let men have some of women’s rights. The answer is NO! It is a shame that women are being forced to concede our hard won gains in 2021!.

C516B3BD-12BD-43B6-90E4-741A2992EC88

Does Peter go gentle into his goodnight. No! he carried on and makes it, if you can believe it, much, much, worse.

His heart is breaking!

Gloves are off now. How FUCKING DARE you! I will decide who my sisters are thank you very much! We are not SUPPORT HUMANS, there to tend to those males you can’t bear to have in your sex class. YOU DO THE WORK! Maybe have a bit of a think about why you can’t tolerate variant masculinity in your spaces?

We are all Biological Essentialists (apparently)

Next up the old accusations of “biological essentialism”. The argument, he is making, is that Women are allowing ourselves to be defined, and limited by our biology. No, Peter, the “Biology is not Destiny” was an attempt to resist being defined ONLY by our reproductive functions. It did NOT mean we deny the basis of sex based oppression, which originates in our ability to gestate babies. Hence a significant amount of feminist activism has been about controlling our fertility in case you hadn’t noticed.

We were not marching for the right of Laurel Hubbard to lift weights with us!

69561A8D-76F1-4617-8DEE-985DB5B8CF9E

Hijacking statements about women’s liberation to re-purpose them for trans idealogues is a tactic we have seen before. It lends credence to your argument, at a superficial level, if you can use our words against us. Way to put the MAN in HuMAN rights Peter.

Tactical Obfuscation

Next up he is claims being a woman is a psychological / emotional state. The last bit is nonsensical. No males are members of the sex class of women, irrespective of their intake of artificial hormones. The bit about reproductive capacity is nonsensical. What is he trying to say here? Even if the franken doctors manage to develop artificial wombs to validate a trans ID male, it STILL won’t make them a woman.

AEEE055C-FCF1-426E-86B2-DC369B3CC2FD

He surpasses himself with his sign off. He doesn’t mean hate us, he just knows better than we do. It is the smug, holier than thou, tone that is really enraging.

F9517847-3DB6-4FDC-8E14-A2EEC7AE9150

Thanks Peter. I feel I may be in danger of adding to the toxicity of this debate because all I have to say to you is FUCK OFF and when you get there FUCK OFF some more. (And I rarely swear on here but everybody has their breaking point.)

paypal.me/STILLTish

Researching the impact of Gender Identity Ideology on women & girls as well as the consequences for Lesbians, Gay males and autistic kids. I do this full time and have no income. All my content is open access and donations help keep me going. Only give IF you can afford. Thank you to my generous donors.

£10.00

Talcum X talks Butler Bollox

Featured

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

Owen Jones and Judith Butler

Here is the YouTube.

Owen Jones and Judith Butler

Who will rid me of these pesky transphobes?

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

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

Transphobia and Islamophobia. 

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

BDE6BE39-66E8-4260-A310-26CE3B3CE0F8

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

Transphobic. ✅

Racist.✅

Dismissal of “Older” women. ✅

Homophobic ✅

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

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

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

 The Trans person’s burden. 

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

No wonder Jones felt obliged to insert this slide..

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

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

What is a woman?

F6C2F968-E3BC-4BEC-AA8D-6AA962537FDC

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

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

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

What is “gender”?

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Stonewall and Historical Revisionism

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

F6C3E574-9080-497D-980D-C0F99949B830

RUTH HUNT

CDDED25D-B9E4-43FF-A6D4-3EAC28D8709B

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

JK Rowling Statement   

Owen commits and unpardonable faux-pas! 

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

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

7B84B34D-2897-45E3-B5BE-EE051D448AC0

Lol!

3456B102-0876-4400-8C56-ECD6A1494BDE

Agreement?

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

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

182CAA5E-B084-4776-86EA-A69F08EAFC2E

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

£10.00

Irreversible Damage: Abigail Shrier

Featured

The Transgender Craze Seducing Our Daughters  

Shrier’s book is a timely contribution documenting increasing levels of  concern over the rising rate of Trans-identifying Females. Young girls are having drastic surgeries/medical intervention, at ever younger ages, in a quest to become their “authentic selves”. Sadly, some of those young women are emerging, in their earlier twenties, to the realisation they were simply Lesbian or in flight from their sex for other reasons.  This self-knowledge sometimes comes after years on testosterone, double mastectomies  and even hysterectomies /ovary removal. 

Facts and figures on the rising numbers of these girls are included in Shrier’s book. Many of the statistics are from the UK because the NHS makes it easier to keep track of the figures.  In the US there are now tens of “Gender Identity” clinics to service the rising rates of “transgender” children /teens. This is a phenomenon across North America, Europe and Australasia. Shrier’s book documents this  with extensive references, an excellent bibliography and conversations with many people at the cutting edge. This includes practitioners working in the field or reporting on this area.  She also shares personal testimony from the young women and their parents.

I have kept quotations to a minimum because you really should buy this book! I have, however,  interspersed some links/blogs to expand, or  reference the UK context.  

FCA2AD73-D849-4840-A4AF-48CBE346D58F

Censorship. 

When research papers, articles or books, are published on the phenomenon of Trans-identifying children/ teens, they are inevitably followed by calls to ban them, accompanied by attacks on the author, sackings, loss of office or sponsorship. This book is no different.

Here is Chase Strangio, from the ACLU (Americal Civil Liberties Union), calling Shrier’s book “dangerous polemic” and calling for it to be taken out of circulation.

863E533B-F491-42CC-8275-6EC01217F731The ACLU have a proud history defending Civil Liberties and Free Speech.  A legacy which has been utterly squandered by its advocacy of Gender Identity Ideology. As an organisation they appear  unwilling to accept that Women, LGB people and even Transsexuals,  have legitimate concerns about the extremist positions of Gender Identity Ideologues.  

Chase Strangio is a Transman and ACLU Lawyer.  Anyone questioning the transitioning of children seems to be perceived as an attack on Chase’s identity, as a man.  Choosing to critique a book without reading it seems to be common in this “debate” but  Chase claims to have actually read it.  This doesn’t  prevent Chase from seeking to deny other people the opportunity. This smacks of authoritarianism and is  shocking from an organisation which,  not too long ago, defended the right to free speech  for members of the Ku-Klux Clan.  

What is happening to Abigail’s book follows a familiar pattern of silencing. This happened to the work of Michael Bailey, Lisa Littman, Ken Zucker and many researchers whose work I have covered on this blog.

Lisa Littman

Lisa Littman coined the term “Rapid Onset Gender Dysphoria”. Lisa Littman spoke to parents with children claiming to be transgender. These children/teens had not shown any signs of discomfort, with their sex, during childhood, and their stories were also at odds with the experience / recollections of their parents. Diane Ehrensaft, a proponent of Gender Identity Ideology, made this statement about talking to parents (p.28). claiming it was akin to “recruiting from Klan or alt-right sites to demonstrate that blacks really are an inferior race”. I would contend that parents are demonised because we know when our children fabricate a fantasy trans-narrative. This knowledge is perceived as dangerous, as is (legal) parental responsibility, to safeguard our children from youthful mistakes. Parents who affirm biological sex are a direct challenge to ideologues, like Ehrensaft, who contend three year olds are competent to know their “gender identity”.

You can read more about what happened to Dr Littman here https://quillette.com/2019/03/19/an-interview-with-lisa-littman-who-coined-the-term-rapid-onset-gender-dysphoria/

You can meet Diane Ehrensaft here: https://youtu.be/DnILbwUL19Y

A tale of two sexes

Ms Shrier’s book centres teenage girls. This makes sense because young girls are emerging as the main demographic being harmed. The causes are also different for females. As a parent of one of the boys, caught up in this, I contend that, whilst there is some overlap in the causality, this is primarily a tale of two sexes. It therefore makes sense to cover boys separately. Let us hope someone takes up the challenge to look at the Transgender Craze in Our Boys. Maybe I will.

Autogynephilia

Shrier does not shy away from covering the more controversial issues accompanying Gender Identity Ideology in our society. This includes a reference to Autogynephilia (AGP) which is a male paraphilia. The love of oneself, as a woman, is the new love that cannot bear to be named. Acknowledging AGP tends to provoke narcissistic rage and backlash and explains a lot of the testeria in this “debate“.

Shrier also talks about the erosion of female only spaces (see anecdote about the bra-fiting for a teenage girl. p.143). She also covers the potential /actual destruction of female sports due to male inclusionary policies. Shrier quotes young women who told her the social cache attached to a transgender identity is in direct contrast to the disregard for Lesbians. (p.151). Why would you want to be Lesbian when it is mainly known as a category of porn? Indeed the depiction of young women, in porn generally, seems suffiicient explanation for a flight from the female sex. Looked at one way adopting a male identity is a perfectly rational response to a hostile environment.

School Policy

Shrier is also excellent on the way Transgender ideology is disseminated, particularly in schools. The same phenonemon is at play in the UK. Sometimes this is done overtly via a Transgender Policy but other times it is slipped in, covertly, under the guise of anti-bullying. To truly root it out you have to check school transgender policy but also anything referencing bullying or equality or inclusion. I am doing a series on all the policies I have found and downloaded. This is one.

School Transgender Policy 1. Brighton: Allsorts

Shrier’s also documents how parents are treated by these policies and by schools, generally.  Parents are  painted as a safeguarding risk to our children, if we don’t  immediately “affirm” a trans identity. I blogged about this here 👇 covering school policies advocating lying to parents about our children and “socially transitioning” them behind our backs. 

Putting the Loco in Loco Parentis

Another issue subject to scrutiny is the threat of suicide and the topic of transgender kids. Not just in the US but globally. This is despite the fact suicide attempts are actually no higher in trans-identifying children than other kids with mental health issues. Completed suicides are actually very rare in transgender youth but they are higher in the adult group post transition. One Swedish study, with the longest follow up time of any other study, found the suicide rate to be significantly higher than their comparator sex. You can read about this here:

https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0016885&type=printable

2020-11-18 (2)

This is one of the longest follow up studies and points to a need for more after care and a review of the outcomes for post-operative transsexuals. This area is replete with references to suicide as evidenced by the repetition of “Better a live daughter than a dead son” . Yet discussion on post-operative mental health issues is verboten.

I wrote about suicide, in transgender youth, below.

Suicide in the Trans Community

Ray Blanchard

Shrier seems to have spoken to most of the prominent voices in this debate. Ray Blanchard is the man who coined the term Autogynephilia. He is very good on the psychological toll it takes to present as the opposite sex. I have written about this, which I call “imposter syndrome on steroids” , after observing and listening to adult transsexuals. Blanchard goes a bit “bad on both sides” re Trans Activists and Gender Critical Feminists (p. 132) but then we do appear to be, or are, critiquing his life’s work.

Medical Treatment

The book is bold and unflinching on the paucity of medical research and provides case studies on the deleterious impact of experimental, medical, solutions to a trans-identity. She points out that there is no reliable test for an innate “Gender Identity”. There is no biological marker. Detransitioners met the diagnostic criteria in the same way as did those who persist, for now, with a medicalised solution to their distress. She explodes the myth that puberty blockers are a pause and emphasises the public data which shows that 100%, put on puberty blockers, will continue to Cross Sex hormones. This is not a pause, it is the introduction to, an almost inevitable, pathway to medical transition. Shrier deals with the risks of puberty blockers (p.165); the shocking statistic of a 5 times higher rate of heart attack in females on testosterone (p. 169) and the medical complications leading to the high rate of hysterectomies after 5 years on testosterone. (p.171). She is also not afraid to name leading proponents of Gender Identity /Medical transition such as Jo Elsson-Kennedy who dismisses post mastectomy regret with this flip response “if you want breasts later on you can go and get them”. (p. 172)

Personal Testimony 

The book is packed with personal stories from parents, adult transsexuals, desisters/de-transitioners. The bulk of these are females, as you would expect, but she does also reference young males. This approach allows us to meet some of the young girls/women caught up in the Transgender phenomenon, putting flesh on the bones of the statistics, just as surely as flesh is being put on the line. We hear the voices of parents endeavouring to navigate a path to protect their children, without alienating them. This is difficult and not always successful. Young women share their stories, one on being a Butch Lesbian, who identified as trans. The anorexic who swapped pro-ana sites for transgender ones. Crucially she ends the book with stories of those who made their way back, to reconcile with their sex and, very often to their formerly estranged families. Because: There is a way back!

Cultural differences

This is clearly a global phenomenon as I have tried to demonstrate. There are also some cultural differences.  I don’t think therapy and medicalised responses to children/teenagers distress are quite as embedded in the UK.  Though I am from the North of England and we can be a bit “haven’t you got any mates?” (Crocodile Dundee Style😉)   about North American reliance on therapy. Shrier has lots to say about parenting styles and our growing impulse to step in when our children encounter difficulties. The phenomenon of Helicopter parents is less embedded in working class culture but is definitely rampant in middle class parenting.  Overall this book translates very well, to the U.K. context,  and it is eerie how much commonalty there is in the experiences of parents on both sides of the atlantic. 

In Conclusion. This is a very important book.

C21B1C31-9535-4CB2-8C0C-437A1601F1A2

Purchasing Abigail’s book via the link, below, will provide funds to a UK Parent’s group (Bayswater Support Group) who support families, with children who identify as transgender, to navigate a path to wholeness.

My copy of this book will be going to a generous donor who has purchased it to help fund my work. If you wish to support me you can do so here.

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.

£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 £

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

Featured

ChildLine YouTube Content.

Following on from part one I began to look at how the ChildLine youtube account and noticed it was saturated in Trans Ideology.  Thus far I have not found any Lesbian content.  I am still working my way through and will post any content that validates actual, same sex attracted, Lesbians.  Yes, I know I should not need to clarify that same sex orientation involves biological sex.

Since 2006 ChildLine  is run by the NSPCC.  The NSPCC isn’t just any children’s charity. It is the only one with statutory powers to remove children from parents. This is enshrined in law to facilitate the removal of children from abusive parents. How the NSPCC decides  what constitutes abuse, matters.  The  NSPCC is so saturated in Queer Theory and the idea that children are #BornInTheWrongBody. What happens if the definition of abuse  covers parents who refuse to medicalise “trans-identifying kids?  Anyone watching what is happening in Canada will know this is not far fetched.  A Canadian father lost his battle to prevent his daughter accessing Puberty Blockers and Cross Sex hormones. His contact with his daughter has been, legally,  restricted to on-line interactions, for three years.  An initial judgement informed him that refusing to use preferred pronouns would be treated as “family violence”.   You can read the full judgement here

This clip is illustrative of how far parental responsibility is being undermined in Canada.  👇

341F12B7-D910-41E7-894A-5C6F0C0904FD

With this context in mind I decided to work through ChildLine content to see what our kids are learning from ChildLine.  This is the second post on this topic. The first covers what the NSPCC/ChildLine are teaching our children about porn.  Queering the NSPCC? Part One.

What it means to be Transgender?

The topic of this log is a ChildLine youtube  on What it means to be Transgender.  The interviewees were  Fox Fisher, who identifies as Non-Binary,  and Mr Lewzer who identifies as a transman. Fisher is a relatively well known trans activist who has appeared in NHS guidance, School Transgender packs  and in the media.  MrLewzer  is a Transman with a popular youtube channel.  Mr Lewzer has also appeared in NHS training guidance as provided by the Transgender Lobby group GIRES. (Gender Identity Research and Education Service) 👇

CD347791-2A23-486E-9488-633DDEAC9F41A link to the video, on YouTube  here.  (Backed up in case of revisionism)

Here also is a transcript transcription of ChildLine Fox Fisher Transgender

3920424A-7682-462F-9843-F4EBCE11371A

The video begins with an attempt at a definition of what it means to be Transgender.  Fisher tells us that this means you don’t “feel connected to the Gender they were assigned at birth”.  Claiming that sex is “assigned” at birth is pure Trans Ideology. Sex is simply observed and recorded in all but an, infinitesimally, small number of cases.  For some people, born with disorders/differences in sexual development, it  may not be straightforward.  The baby may need chromosomal/ karyotype  tests.  Discussion of trans identity often conflates these very different issues.  There is no evidence that there is a significant correlation between people with DSDs and people with a Transgender Identity. Indeed, in the U.K., research was undertaken which resulted in the discontinuation of karyotype testing, at Gender Identity Clinics.  Source for this 👇 quote here

51D27DA6-0FFB-40BC-B9FA-847FD380DF24

Defining the undefinable

There’s lots more incoherent & inconsistent statements about “gender” . Gender is a spectrum between male and female; but some people don’t identify with either; and it’s really an individual choice.  Valiant attempts are made to separate “Gender Expression“ from “Gender Identity” but they all return to superficial signifiers like dress and hair. . Good luck codifying “Gender Identity” into law based on these  nebulous descriptions. Gender Identity is a faith based and subjective belief system.  Best stick with the fact that we are Sexually Dimorphic and reserve compassion for the tiny number of people with DSDs who genuinely need some specific accommodations.

Hallelujah!

Mr Lewzer explains that some people wish to modify their body but some do not. Mr Lewzer tells us It’s a misconception that hormones and surgery make you a man or a woman”

C7F08336-0368-4A40-9411-0263330B7522

Sadly this display of logic was short-lived.   In a further elucidation of the point we are told, regardless of any bodily modification, it is incumbent on the rest of us to accept a Self-identified gender. Acceptance without Exception!

Terminology.  Keep up!

Fox:  “I no longer use the term Female to Male. To me it implies that I was female. I think a lot of people find that problematic”.

Lewzer explains that they do use the term, MTF, for simplicity’s sake. Though they also add:

991F59D3-B3DB-4FE2-8952-DAFC6886EB82

Amy, the interviewer, helpfully explains that using the language of “ the community“ , is all about being “considerate of what other people feel”.   Tricky territory when this  clip  illustrates the acceptable language is contested even within the community.  The interviewer is also pushing a version of the #BeKind, faux-feminism that places the majority burden, and risk, on females, forced to affirm males as literal females. 

CABA7B84-D668-4C0E-9F60-9891BCAEC1F2

Strategic Deployment of “Transmen”

It’s also notable that post-medicalised females are often centred in particular discussions. Testosterone packs a  punch on the female body so, Transmen are often “passing”. Whilst they don’t  typically, present a threat to biological males , in female spaces they are likely to disrupt a social norms. They may find themselves in no-mans land.  If women read you as male they will respond accordingly.  At best they will feel uncomfortable. Male To Female (MTF) are less likely to pass and will be coded male in female spaces.   Fox Fisher helpfully interjects to correct the, problematic terminology of “passing” . Apparently we should not use it  because some people don’t aspire to pass as the opposite sex.  Right.  Thus far it’s as clear as mud.

Amy follows up on her appeal to kindness and adopting trans terminology by demonstrating her willingness to ignore the female community.  Here she explains what Cisgender means, as if it’s an unproblematic definition . 89714988-12D9-48D4-A55B-6B2B29CF59CFIn fact many women reject the idea that we identify with our “Gender” which we see as  a collection of , culturally variable, sex stereotypes.  We don’t , necessarily, identify with our Gender. We simply are our Sex. My response to this is simply

A7D78330-BBD3-416E-9ECD-46B8B65B62E9

Celebrating Gender Non-Conformity?

Another worrying aspect of this piece is the idea that playing around with your “Gender” is a harmless part of adolescent development.   It is true that teenagers go through a period of personality formation; which can include conformity to, or rejection of, expectations for their sex. It is  normal to be experimenting with how to navigate this the bridge to adulthood. However it is only a recent phenomenon that this has involved considering, or, undertaking, medical pathways. That concretises adolescent playfulness in unprecedented ways.

Mr Lewzer explains how mum was persuaded things would be OK by showing her positive stories of Transitioners. “They looked good, they are happy and healthy and have relationships”. Yes! Mr Lewzer. This is the age of social media when people carefully curate their content  to craft a public persona.  Moreover the next statement is striking for what it leaves out.  Puberty Blockers have been given to children as young as 10, in the U.K. They invariably progress to cross sex hormones.  They are not a reversible intervention.  Confirmation from a Tavistock clinic . Britain’s main Gender Identity Clinic is covered here: TAVISTOCK PART THREE (A)

AD56EA1F-D8E9-4E59-A8F0-E687A81E5BFB

Before I leave this post I want to refer to Fox Fisher’s statement about their own bodily distress. Fox tells us they felt a lot of shame about how they felt. “Throughout my teenage years I had not respect for myself, my body, or anything like that. I’d hate for any young person to have to go through that”.  There’s a glaring contradiction at the heart of this ideology.  It is built on bodily rejection, but dressed up as a person liberation and a route to become your authentic self.

The other elephant in the room is that Lesbians and Gay males are no stranger to performing “Gender” in ways that confound societal expectations.  Internalised homophobia can easily manifest itself as shame and bodily hatred.  I have written on this topic many times. The Woke Gay Conversion Therapy?

I want to leave you with Fox Fisher’s statement at a Mermaids summer camp. Youtube original removed but here is archived content.  Fox Fisher   (Worth watching the whole thing which defends 3 year olds knowing they have a Gender Identity that doesn’t match their sex and a court case in which  child was removed from the Mother who was deemed to be, inappropriately, fostering a Social Transition)

I  cannot imagine any other activist being allowed to express this sentiment  👇and remain associated with a charity which proclaims itself as an ally of the LGBTQ+

FAEAB234-FA94-4C14-AB8D-EAC321F42E24