We’re Still Here Conference 8th September: A report from the inside

That Telegraph article.

The National Front had picketed the first PIE meeting at Conway Hall, in London’s Red Lion Square and spat and punched at the paedophiles as they went in, while members of the National Council for Civil Liberties (NCCL) attempted to protect them. To younger people now, it seems incredible that Leftists once defended paedophiles. But, to their shame, and the continuing long-term harm of British children, many did. I know that better than most, remembering our anguished, earnest conversations.

Notable how nowadays one of the go to debating points of TRAs is that the GC position is funded by the far right and that if you agree with the right on anything it shows you're a bigot. Well, even people who are wrong on some of the big stuff are not wrong about everything.

www.reddit.com/r/GenderCritical/comments/94tk2i/radfem_conservatives_vs_libfem/

The parallels are really rather striking aren't they....

PIE fooled so many on the Left, within academia and in social work, because they adroitly hijacked the language of liberation. Little was known then or discussed about the extent or horror of child abuse. PIE members also portrayed themselves as “child lovers”, benign uncle figures who offered tenderness, not rape.

They claimed that paedophiles, like women, gay men and children, were “oppressed by the patriarchy”. Therefore we should all make common cause. Spare Rib, to its credit, refused to fall for this self-serving guff. But nor did we condemn it. I was the staffer delegated to read O’Carroll’s book, and I lacked the courage to be branded “homophobic” — as opponents of PIE were. So we just ignored it.

www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/10653950/We-on-the-Left-lacked-the-courage-to-be-branded-homophobic-so-we-just-ignored-it.-I-wish-I-hadnt.html

But, extraordinarily, to the detriment of both vulnerable children and ordinary, decent gay men, men campaigning for sex with small boys had cynically positioned themselves under the sheltering banner of gay rights.

It's when you put it all together that it gets really bad.

• Tell kids that their parents know nothing, they should place their trust in adults and older teens who really get it - their new glitter family

• Tell teachers and social workers that kids know their own minds, if they say their parents are unsympathetic, that should be accepted without question, so the school can change the child's name and gender but the parents needn't be told and social workers can step in to remove a child from a family to make sure they get their binder and blockers

• Tell HCPs that it's conversion therapy to question why a child is experiencing gender dysphoria, forbid it, make it a disciplinary offence, make affirmation the only acceptable approach

• Relentlessly push the dodgy suicide stats in the media and to politicians to inhibit free discussion

• Push for no lower limit on getting a GRC - kids know their own minds! They can be trusted to make sensible decisions on all sorts of things.

It doesn't take much from that point for another nefarious group of activists to piggyback on all of this and start arguing for a reduction in the age of consent. After all, kids know their own minds!

Jane Fae is absolutely right. We should not assign gender to children. What Jane gets wrong, though, is the idea gender should be assigned later in life. There is no need to assign it ever.
Just record sex at birth, as it is important for medical reasons, for safeguarding (we wouldn‘t want teenage pregnancies from a school trip and so forth), and for grouping people right in sports competitions, based on their sex based capacities, and it is all sorted.

Why indeed...

JF seems to think that that quirky, obscure, not making much sense style, is appealing. It isn't.

Nor is this.

We could wait until people reach the age of maturity – 18. Or we could trust individuals, as we do when it comes to contraception, and allow them to choose as soon as they are competent to do so, perhaps aged 12 or 13 (Gillick principle).
But I guess all the pseudo-feminists who argue now that a 13 year old cannot know their gender would remain consistent and insist on waiting til 18.

Why the intense interest in lowering the age of consent for everything to do with sex/sexuality/gender ?

Those incoherent tweets from JF have me raging! How dare JF make light of the effects of the decision to be trans on other people (aka the poor naive stupid wife who never suspected that the cross-dressing could turn into this, but too bad, you can't just divorce now?!). Controlling much? Fucker.

Yes, that's what bothers me. JF is not very bright and JF's advocacy for extreme porn is all on the record. So why is everything JF and so many of the other middle-aged transitioners treated as gospel? Why are people at the top of government so gullible and uncritical in their thinking?

It's very concerning how no one does the slightest amount of due diligence any more. Or thinks about how this might look outside the bubble.

pachy it’s ridiculous and I seen many the TRAs saying that hasn’t been no problems in Ireland, of course I didn’t believe that

Yes, that's what bothers me. JF is not very bright and JF's advocacy for extreme porn is all on the record. So why is everything JF and so many of the other middle-aged transitioners treated as gospel? Why are people at the top of government so gullible and uncritical in their thinking?

Yes that thread really didn't make a lot of sense. I think I thought JF was more intelligent than that, clearly I was wrong!

Ye Gods, PleaseTellUsWhy - that thread. The state of it. The utter lack of critical thinking or intelligence or awareness of women and girls. And from someone who has a teenage daughter, who I'm certain will be all too aware of her 'gender' on account of being catcalled, patronised, upskirted, told to sit nicely and be kind since before she can remember.

I wonder what waiting until people were 18 before deciding on 'gender' would do for teenage pregnancy rates?

(And why does this loon think that 'pseudo-feminists' would advocate waiting?? Honestly, it's so batshit I can't even make sense of it. I wouldn't waste the mental energy trying, if this person didn't have the ear of the fucking government.)

She then quoted at length from a song from “The Greatest Showman”. I wish I was making that up

I just can't get over this bit.....

Hello, I've joined specifically to post this from Twitter - it's a thread reader version of some tweets the other day from Jne Fe. It seemed to go with what's been discussed on this thread. Note the stress on children being able to make this lifechanging decision at a very young age. Note the disdain for women. threadreaderapp.com/thread/1052841553364996096.html

Thanks for being there and informing us. It's very frightening. Accusing radfems of making up skirt pics of transwomen is rediculous.

Mermaids are apparently interested in researching the crossover with trans/ autism and also sexual orientation

Mermaids are not researchers. Stay the fuck away from autistic kids.

Linking this thread which is relevant to what pachyderm said.

http://www.mumsnet.com/Talk/amiibeingunreasonable/3265165-Well-it-s-happened-the-trans-activists-have-waded-into-the-8th-amendment-issue-in-Ireland

Fully agree pachyderm, chilling is the right word.

correction, it's National Women's Council of Ireland They're on the board now.

Great work Harpy

The TRAs in Ireland were very successful in infiltrating the abortion rights campaign, while ultimately making it all about them. Middle aged late transitioners talking about their own need for "bodily autonomy", because of course a man wanting a state-funded vaginoplasty and hormone treatment is the same as a woman with a crisis pregnancy. Policing the language to centre themselves (pregnant people) and ensuring the exclusion and demonisation of women who resisted. Together for Yes was the final push where the various campaigns came together, and I know they reverted back to "pregnant women" because they knew ordinary people would be turned off by gender neutral language around this issue. This caused a few tantrums and as soon as Repeal went through, they were back, raging about discrimination and the next push, which is to include gender neutral terms in the legislation being drafted. They have infiltrated every organisation from the National Council of Women in Ireland to the Girl Guides.

It's chilling. What I've seen (and I know more than I'm going to post here) is vulnerable people with assorted mental health issues and personality disorders being manipulated by older seasoned well funded lobbyists with a very disturbing agenda. And lots of young, poorly educated ignorant woke people cheerleading this as the new progressive campaign like same sex marriage and abortion rights.

In a country with such a poor record of child protection and women's rights, it's the most depressing thing I've seen in my lifetime.

I know the discussion has moved on somewhat now but can't stop analysing the OP after reading it this morning. What stands out is

TWAW is a facade - anyone who clearly articulates they are only paying lip service to women's issues does not believe they are a woman

It's all about overturning women as a protected characteristic, and gaining access to women/child spaces

Which we knew already. But so blatant here.

Registering a birth
2.2 The law requires every birth to be registered
by the district registrar. The details to be
registered are set out in regulations and include
the child’s sex. There is no definition of sex in the
relevant legislation.

So, the difference between sex and gender were known in 2000.

I won't keep copy and pasting, but that document discusses prisons and that 'pre-op transsexuals' should be placed in the estate that matches their birth gender, and post-op in new gender (sex not used as a descriptive term in that instance)

Sport - 'a key concern is that of ensuring fairness to other competitors, especially with male to female where despite reassignment treatment they are likely to have a physical advantage over other women' (So they knew then and they know now that it is unfair but have decided that that doesn't matter anymore)

In a conclusion, it is stated that 'many people revert to their biological sex and some alternate between the two sexes throughout their lives' and yet they then go down the male and female brain approach - which surely doesn't stack up against male and female brain if people change back and forth!

They push for transsexualism as an intersex condition and also state that

'Ormrod made chromosomes, gonads and genitals the defining factors in sex. There is no doubt that this test is no longer scientifically viable

So I would expect that there would be a wealth of scientific, peer reviewed data showing what is viable to have been produced over the last 18 years, given that in 2000 the biological sex markers were out of date. But there doesn't seem to be any. Funny, that.

I've skimmed through the link that CatsOwl provided and it raises some interesting points about what was known about then and is being dismissed now.

Gender Reassignment
1.5 Gender reassignment is commonly termed a
sex change, but in reality it is an alteration only in
a person’s physical characteristics. The biological
sex of an individual is determined by their
chromosomes, which cannot be changed. What
can be achieved through the transsexual person’s
own efforts, and with counselling, drugs and
surgery is social, hormonal and surgical
reassignment.