This does not fit with "follow the money" explanations for transactivism but fits much better with "queering society" theories.
"Being Trans just means saying you are Trans" is the ultimate aim, going by one of the Keynote Speeches at Epath 2019:
Full text here:
epath.eu/wp-content/uploads/2019/04/Dinah-Bons.pdf
My highlights bolded
Dinah Bons (strategic director TGEU)
“DEPATHOLOGISATION: OPPORTUNITIES AND CHALLENGES”
(What does depath mean and how it affects trans people’s health)
" . . . the World Health Organisation finally removed trans identities from the mental health disorders chapter in its latest edition of the International Classification of Diseases and included them in a new chapter called “Conditions related to Sexual Health”.
Let’s not forget that this change includes a diagnosis for children, Gender Incongruence in Childhood, contributing to their pathologisation when no medical treatment is needed.
We urge you to join our fight for this category (Gender Incongruence in Childhood) to be removed as soon as possible.
Nevertheless, this long-awaited change lays the foundation for a new era in which the rights and lives of trans people are valued and respected, and trans people are seen as what they really are, part of human diversity. This will ultimately assist trans people in exercising their right to self-determination at all levels.
We will be able to have our legal gender recognized without any kind of medical requirement."
" . . . When we see trans people in the media, their stories won’t always be about how we feel about our bodies, how terrible it is to be trans and how we desperately need to physically transition.
"I want to make note of trans-led grassroots health services providers, in the UK and in the Netherlands, that mark an important development.
(There is nothing further said about the UK but I am guessing that this relates to the decision by NHS Specialist Commissioning to set up "Trans Health Services" across the UK, with the first to be piloted in Manchester this year:
www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3556114-Greater-Manchester-Trans-Health-Service )
EPATH Conference Programme (featuring some familiar UK names on their usual soap-boxes):
epath.eu/conference-2019/program-overview/
I came across that EPATH speech after some ferreting around for references to the "European Network for the Investigation of Gender Incongruence (ENIGI)".
This was because I was originally going to post here about a recent article in Nature about ENIGI (I will do a separate post).
However, one paragraph in the Nature article jumped out at me:
"Although transgender issues are becoming more mainstream, the topic remains politically charged. The European groups sometimes encounter transgender activists who oppose any medical intervention — T’Sjoen says he has had talks disrupted by people arguing that transgender people should not give in to social pressure. Although that could be true for some people, he says, for others, “even if they were living somewhere on a desert island, they would still want to change their body”.
(The "European Groups" are, I think, trans-led Gender Clinics in Holland, Belgium, Germany and Norway.)
This suggests that non-dysphoric trans people (the non-binaries and "gender queer") are definitely seeking to take over the trans movement at the expense of dysphoric transsexuals.
Going back to that EPATH speech:
1) CHILDREN DO NOT NEED HORMONES OR SURGERY TO BE TRANS
Where does the massive rise of Rapid Onset Gender Dysphoria (ROGD), especially among girls, fit in with this?
If it DOES fit in then the only explanation I can think of is horribly cynical.
How relieved would so many parents, public service funders and insurance companies be if . . . if the Trans lobby started advocating that childhood dysphoria does not exist and there is no need for hormones or surgery to be trans?
Cue: the end of ROGD as "Self-ID" is ushered in?
IF it is true that lots of kids are parroting pro-forma "right words" to get on the Trans Train to hormones and surgery then it is also true that they do not have dysphoria.
That is, that the massive rise, the clusters of kids in peer groups, etc. is due to "social contagion" . . . and the next "social contagion" to replace ROGD? The non-binary "no pain" path to "Gender Diversity"?
2) TRANS HEALTH SERVICES
Exactly what the Trans Lobby has persuaded the NHS to pilot this year.
Cue: redirect funds from Gender Identity Services to "Trans Health Services" - with some token funding left over for those annoying kids and adults, that tiny minority who have some vague, officially undiagnosable problem that some medics insist on referring to as "gender dysphoria" (the wrong-side-of-history transphobes!)?
3) NEW ERA - NON-MEDICALISED SELF-ID
Exactly what the Trans Lobby persuaded the Commons "Women and Equalities Committee" is the way to go?
Who would benefit from complete "depath" of Transgender Identities - soon to be renamed "Gender Diversity"?
It can't be the people profiting from sale of hormones and surgery because the argument is that they are not necessary . . . or is that just for children? The EPATH speech only argues for removing "Gender Incongruence in Childhood" as a Diagnostic Category.
If the idea is that in this "New Era" that Adults will still need access to a medical diagnosis and therefore a route to medical treatment . . . we know already who those adults are. They are men who want "feminising" hormones and surgery.
Is that still part of the Big Trans Plan??
I am having difficulty squaring the lack of any call to remove "ADULT Gender Incongruence" with statements about the "New Era" being one in which Trans people are happy with their bodies and do not need to physically transition, ie. transgender people deny gender dysphoria exists. (How very "dysphoriaphobic"!)
Apologies for the length of this post!