Written By:
weka - Date published:
10:57 am, May 16th, 2024 - 40 comments
Categories: feminism, gender critical feminism, sexism, uncategorized -
Tags: detrans, gender conservative, gender critical, inflection point
A 4 minute video where a young lesbian woman talks about what puberty blockers and testosterone did to her body and sexuality as a teen. Essential viewing for anyone with an opinion about sex, gender and the transitioning of children and young people. It is not unusual to hear stories about the harms of transitioning from detransitioners, but their voices are often sidelined or minimised.
By the way, that whole thing playing out in New Zealand over Inflection Point wanting to hire a Wellington City Council venue to run a panel of speakers challenging gender ideology, it’s important to understand the difference between gender critical and gender conservative.
People like Brian Tamaki and Bob McCroskie are gender conservative. Their objections to LGBTQI+ are based in wanting to retain a rigid gender binary based on biological sex with specific, separate roles for men and women.
Gender critical feminists critique gender identity ideology on the basis that patriarchal enforced gender roles and stereotypes harm women and children, and also men.
The gender critical movement started with left wing feminists, but is now broadened out to cover a wide range of positions and views. When you look at Inspection Point’s speakers, see if you can tell which are gender critical and which are gender conservative.
The current rise of populism challenges the way we think about people’s relationship to the economy.We seem to be entering an era of populism, in which leadership in a democracy is based on preferences of the population which do not seem entirely rational nor serving their longer interests. ...
The server will be getting hardware changes this evening starting at 10pm NZDT.
The site will be off line for some hours.
Gender critical vs gender conservative makes for strange bedfellows alright. Just looking at the speakers page and there's Jan Rivers in between Bob McCroskie and Brian Tamaki! I'd say every single person attending this is going to hear at least one thing they vehemently disagree with – which is by no means a bad thing.
I'm coming to think that too. Would be nice to have more GCFs but they won't platform themselves with the GConserves so this is what it is. Strange times.
I admire the ones who will share a platform with conservatives, and vice versa. There's far too much mistaking our political beliefs for moral virtues going on. On both sides.
We are best off mixing and talking with people with different views. That way we get to influence them (and them us).
Brilliant FSU debate in Auckland last year. Simon Wilson and Opportunity Party candidate versus GC Holly Lawford Smith and a Wellington academic David.
David disclosed in his right of reply that he sat through some appalling discussions with members of the clergy around the time homosexuality was de-criminalised. He then said he was gay and he had to put up with all sorts of shit (didn't use that word). But he said it was worth it, because that is how people change their minds , when you engage with them. It was brilliant and very moving.
Good on Simon Wilson for taking part, I bet he got stick for that.
It's online, I will have a listen when I get the chance.
https://youtu.be/EWnStYxMSmo?si=WT49j2x7PmSt8623
IMO Simon didn't come across well at all and the Top guy made very little sense. But good on anyone for having the debate. Vic Uni Association tried to shut down a recent free speech debate, because Jonathan Ayling was taking part
Oh God, decriminalisation of homosexuality. The stuff that even MPs were coming out with in Parliament back then was just horrendous. The temptation for gay people at the time to just shout "Fuck you!" rather than engaging with them must have been intense.
Yes I can understand people wanting to shout fuck you. A very human response. But engaging with people we disagree with is far more powerful.
I hope the G Critical people influence the gender Conservatives at that conference. Rather than ghosting others, thats how we get change.
Two millionth comment on TS! 🥳
Appreciate the sentiment of engaging in robust debate and facing your critics.
I'm listening to the Heterodorx podcast this week, various episodes. Nina Paley and Corrina Cohn. Cohn is a transexual, Paley is a terf. Paley is libertarian, not sure about Cohn's politics, but it's very interesting hearing the GC politics from a non-left, non-right pov. Their ability to tolerate difference while being clear in their own minds is fantastic.
For those that haven't seen it https://www.heterodorx.com/
(don't start with the Brianna Wu two parter unless you have a yearning for an intense experience, and know beforehand that Wu is a trans identified male who never acknowledges that).
"There's far too much mistaking our political beliefs for moral virtues"
Such a great point. And it can be so hard to remain calm and civil when we're confronted with opposing beliefs.
And yet you don't have to be a gender-critical feminist OR a religious conservative to understand that kids are impressionable, prone to crazes and phases, and need responsible guidance and protection by adults. A 13-yr old girl cannot give informed consent to medicalization of her gender dysphoria.
And the stupid thing is, it doesn't have to be a "war".
No other medical treatment has been the subject of such magical thinking and extreme behaviour from its advocates.
Unfortunately, history shows us that any time an ideology attempts to enforce its beliefs on others, or demand that other people's behaviour is changed in accordance with the requirements of the ideology, the same things happen.
Heretics and apostates are punished – by either the Mob, or the State.
The ideal is that the levers of the State are captured in order to support the ideology. It is required to be taught in schools, enforced by the legal system and demanded to be demonstrated in speech and dress, especially by those in Government or positions of authority.
But very few people see it as an ideology, they think in simplistic terms of gay liberation vs conservative bigots. I really appreciate the quality work of fullyinformed.nz and Dr Cass and others keeping a calm voice of sanity in the middle of those who revel in controversy
Indeed – but Trans is not the "New Gay". Just like one ideology takes over the rituals and history of the society it wishes to capture – Gender Ideology has captured the public relations and symbolism of Gay Liberation.
It does this at the behest of those who spent most of the last half century denying that they had anything to do with homosexuality. "We are not Gay – we have wives and kids. We just get very excited in women's underwear".
The de-transitioners are what keeps me plugging away working to expose the cult of GI.
Its horrific what these people have gone through due to this damagingideology
Civilian casualties … because of the lack of health care services …
https://www.newshub.co.nz/home/lifestyle/2024/05/luxon-promises-more-money-for-healthcare-in-general-in-response-to-calls-for-better-access-to-gender-affirming-surgery.html
who is the casualty? The teenager? How much of the waiting list is due to gender identity ideology and the explosion of numbers of girls not wanting to be girls because of that and affirmation only?
There is no way to know from the media story whether that teen needed a double mastectomy due to extreme gender dysphoria or had no access to a holistic model of care.
The MSM are complicit. Imagine writing that piece after the Cass Review final report was released, and after the WPATH file leaks, both this year, and not reporting on the full issues and instead saying the 18 year old tried to remove their own breasts because of an upcoming pool party.
The mental health aspects are completely ignored – the media prefer to support the notion that it's a physical problem (instead of 'dysphoria' it's become more PC to use the term 'incongruence')
A functional mental health system could have alleviated this person's suffering
I have some sympathy for the idea that trans people shouldn't be inherently pathologised. But I struggle to see how such extreme body modifications aren't based in mental health issues.
And interesting comparison is the young woman in the Netherlands who has been approved for euthanasia on the basis of extreme mental distress, assuming to be permanent. She said she has tried talk therapy, medication and ECT but is still in great anguish. There are a lot more options than those three.
https://www.theguardian.com/society/article/2024/may/16/dutch-woman-euthanasia-approval-grounds-of-mental-suffering
I also think that in an ideal world most people can be relieved of their suffering, but we don't live in that world. Given that, should people 18 and over be enable into surgical transition? How about euthanasia? Of course the problem is also the bullshit that has destroyed informed consent with the former, which makes me wonder why it won't happen with the latter.
This is some of the most irresponsible reporting I have ever seen. It looks too like the story came from the health professionals involved in this young persons surgery. It is very manipulative.
Its alerting young vulnerable distressed people to the u tube channels where they can do self surgery and then go to ED and be fast tracked to masectomies. Shocking
did those three doctors write up a case study and hand it to the MSM? I found this but can't find the report.
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/38754119/
People (young people too BTW) who need cataract surgery have to pay privately, or wait until they are almost blind, to get the surgery, and that is in just one eye.
Likewise if you need hearing aids you have to pay at about $6-$7k per hearing aid, or maybe loose your job because you’re unable to hear.
People born with severe facial deformities, or those who need facial reconstructive surgery after cancer treatment are unlikely to have the public health system pay for surgery. The reconstruction surgery is considered cosmetic and/or for mental health purposes, not medical reasons.
Someone wanting to remove perfectly normal parts of their anatomy, should pay for the surgery themselves.
It's a valid consideration, but I do think that medical decisions should be made based on reducing suffering, rather than on what anybody considers to be an obviously valid norm.
Mention of suffering is interesting.
It's an old adage that pain is inevitable, suffering is optional. Suffering being the attitude chosen that arises with pain.
If the medical side of this issue can get to the root of the suffering and alleviate that, everyone is better off.
Edit, I see weka above addressed the suffering.
I agree. Did you watch the video in the post? One of the big missing pieces in all this is the stories of detransitioners. How do we weigh up immediate suffering with lifelong suffering?
People like Brian Tamaki and Bob McCroskie are gender conservative
…then, can someone please clarify the difference between "gender conservative" and "homophobic"?
Clearly, I've got the wrong idea.
homophobic is prejudice against homosexual people.
transphobic is prejudice against trans people, but it's also a term that is now so broadly used as to often be nonsensical eg people saying that sex is biologically binary or that women need single sex spaces are called transphobic.
Gender critical is a body of politics that critiques gender identity ideology (an ideology that says everyone has a gender identity, that gender identity should trump sex, that sex isn't binary as so on).
Originally much gender critical politics came from left wing feminists. When others got involved, feminists started naming themselves as gender critical feminists to differentiate themselves from gender critical people that had centrist or right wing politics.
Gender conservative is a new terms to differentiate people who support conservative gender and sex roles, from the people who think gender roles are harmful. It's not about homosexuality, but obviously fundamentalist religious people for instance can be homophobic and conservative about gender in their critique of trans rights politics.
Gender identity ideology wants to break the binary, but it also enforces it. Hence trans iconography is pink/blue.
Thanks,
I still remember when I thought LGBT was probably a sports car…
I do try to keep up.
It's akin to the Covid resistance.
There folk who were hesitant right through to anti-vax (of any form).
While there were common aims, the motivations were vastly different. It is convenient and lazy to lump them all together.
BTW, well done with the mahi on keeping an even-handed and critical narrative going.
Thinking back twenty years or more… no-one back then went around asserting that Georgina Beyer was a man. Her existence was quite happily tolerated.
Beyer underwent gender surgery as an adult.
Since around 2000, blockers and surgeries for minors have increased tenfold, and the procedures are uncritically lauded as a magic bullet, when most patients have a lot more complex issues. Hence the heartbreaking stories of the detransitioners like the poor lass in the main article.
'Beyer underwent gender surgery as an adult.
Since around 2000, blockers and surgeries for minors have increased tenfold […]'
An important statement on an unrelated point.
'[…] the procedures are uncritically lauded as a magic bullet […].'
Are they? By whom? Threads like this certainly indicate otherwise.
Just google "transgender news nz" or "gender affirming nz". Uncritical affirmation is the mainstream position.
Critical and balanced articles like the following, by Prof Charlotte Paul, are the exception, not the norm: A Terrible Trap — North & South Magazine (northandsouth.co.nz)
Nor did GB insist that we call her a woman pro nouns she/her
As I have said before – people like Carmen, Georgina, Niccole etc were gay men at a time when sex between men was unlawful. They literally "transed away the Gay".
As the Cass Review – and the Tavistock reports showed, a large % of the young people who requested their services were also same sex attracted and subject to internalised homophobia. They were also trying to "trans away the Gay".
The well publicised stories of children who were transed by their parents – like Jazz Jennings and Jackie Green – also tell a similar story of a homophobic parent (and an entrepreneurial parent). They made a lot of $$$ "transing away the Gay".
'As I have said before – people like Carmen, Georgina, Niccole etc were gay men at a time when sex between men was unlawful. They literally "transed away the Gay".'
:citation needed:
what's changed in 20 years?
The trans umbrella now including cross dressing men, part timers, NB, basically anyone who doesn't want to be a normie.
Self ID and the removal of women's single sex spaces and provisions
The shift from private and restricted cross-dressing to public autogynephilia, including in women's single sex spaces
The massive increase in young women, often lesbian and/or autistic, seeking to escape being female because it's just so goddamn awful for them
An increase in medical and surgical transition in young people, leading to an increase in the numbers of detransitioners with lifelong medical problems, pain and disability
Women being raped and sexually harassed in women's prisons by males self IDing as trans in order to be housed in women's prisons
I could go on, but I have to go out. The list of changes is very long. You refer to a post-op transsexual male and if that had been all that had happened in the past 20 years, there wouldn't be a problem. We're not in Kansas any more.