Julie Bindel piece interviewing a now-dissenting Yogyakarta drafter

It makes me wonder what other human rights law or principles were drafted where everyone 'forgot' about women. Or any other group. This was 2006! Not the 19th century.

I'm wondering if the toilets quote was taken out of context. It's so dim.

Such an interesting article. Surely the fact that Wintemute now has doubts after the realisation of the conflict with women’s rights means that it should be revisited and revised?

In the Twitter comments in Julie Bindel’s account (where she posts this article) someone asks if it was pitched to mainstream media. The co-author says she pitched it to The Times without success.
Someone suggests trying The Spectator. Fingers crossed...

Really interesting interview. If he and Julie Bindel and any of the other architects of Yogyakarta or indeed the architects of the UK GRA who can recognise how the goalposts have been shifted against women using these principles or laws could please pitch to a major UK paper or documentary maker about their regrets that would be powerful. I’m really glad he gets it now. Comes with some responsibilities though- it’s a unique position he and those people hold and gives them a platform.

So what is Wintemute going to do about it?

Apart from wring his hands and say "we didn't think..."?

It’s pretty well established. The fact that the UN state single sex toilets are a “moral imperative” but UN Women also say TWAW has long been a source of anger:

mobile.twitter.com/UN_Women/status/1235977079839166464

"When you talk about trans women in toilets, well, many countries don’t have toilets, so how can that be a primary concern?”
It would be interesting to know how the safety of women correlates with something like toilets and single sex toilets. I suspect women are safer in countries where toilets are routinely available.

yogyakartaprinciples.org/introduction-yp10/

I can't see a drafting committee list for the original principles, but it says:
A distinguished group of human rights experts has drafted, developed, discussed and refined these Principles. Following an experts’ meeting held at Gadjah Mada University in Yogyakarta, Indonesia from 6 to 9 November 2006, 29 distinguished experts from 25 countries with diverse backgrounds and expertise relevant to issues of human rights law unanimously adopted the Yogyakarta Principles on the Application of International Human Rights Law in relation to Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity.

I understood that the original principles were drafted by those 29 people.

I've had a quick look at some of the archived versions of the wiki page, and I can't see any names which aren't on those lists.

I wonder to what extent the overlooking of the effects comes out a kind of unspoken assumption that if you do things logically and with good will, there will not be rights conflicts.

I'd kind of expect experts in the area to know otherwise but maybe not.

They are the signatories. Not the writers.

TheInebriati
Whats your alternative suggestion for a workplace that has been captured?
Instead of just criticising, offer a viable alternative because women are facing this agenda in their everyday lives and it has consequenses.

I think there are several different arguments that can be used, and one is indeed that we should not arm-twist people to "out" themselves as trans if they may not want to, which I actually think is a valid argument, but one that we can give in its own right rather than having to say "according to the Yogyakarta principles, we should not..." which to me is giving the "principles" a legitimacy that I don't think they deserve.

Other strong arguments against compulsory pronoun declarations are that they may lead to increased discrimination against women, or the effect of "stereotype threat" on them, through being pushed to specifically identify themselves as female; the right to privacy generally; the fact that some people may be questioning/unsure of how they identify; the relevance of requiring the information, and GDPR considerations, and probably others I haven't thought of just now.

I'm absolutely not saying that we shouldn't object, only that we should not base our objections on something as misogynistic and cod-sciencey (under the guise of "human rights") as much of the YPs are.

I did a lot of research about the people involved in the Yog principles, they were named on Wikipedia and elsewhere. One by one many of the men on Wiki disappeared. I suspect they have reappeared under different identities.

What do you mean by different identities? The people involved are listed here:

<a class="break-all" href="https://web.archive.org/web/20161030033904/yogyakartaprinciples.org/annex/" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">web.archive.org/web/20161030033904/yogyakartaprinciples.org/annex/

<a class="break-all" href="https://web.archive.org/web/20171201180854/www.yogyakartaprinciples.org/signatories-yp10/" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">web.archive.org/web/20171201180854/www.yogyakartaprinciples.org/signatories-yp10/

I just checked these archived pages and the lists of names are identical to the ones on the current pages.

I want to be shocked that women are never thought of but I'm not.

I did a lot of research about the people involved in the Yog principles, they were named on Wikipedia and elsewhere. One by one many of the men on Wiki disappeared. I suspect they have reappeared under different identities. Wiki's yog page has completly changed over the three or four years I've watched it. I recognised a name of a man that I know who worked for a children's NGO I worked at, with a dodgy cloud over him when he was fired. He's vanished from the page now.

Bindel cites the group recently set up to push the arguments for repeal of the GRA.

She, and the professor touch on some of them, but there are any more, once you start looking into the real life consequences for women and girls, and the nightmare it has created for safeguarding.

www.repealthegra.org/the-argument-for-repeal

It is unconscionable that a professor of human rights law actually just forgot women not only exist, but are supposed to have human rights too.

He has an awful lot of work to do, to make up for this mistake.

Very interesting article. I recognised his name - probably from when he signed the kathleen stock support letter. I had no idea he was one of the ones who signed the yogyakarta principles.

What stood out for me was how recent the realisation was, and how ppl who really ought to be aware are completely unaware, and how odd that is. I was already eyes open and reading here & elsewhere by the time he was giving his summer school talk in summer 2018. And he was really surprised to find out that if you point to a manifestation of the conflict of rights, and acknowledge that other ppl have needs too, you will have stepped over an invisible line. Yet he had been working on the exact field of trans rights.

So it's not woke enough basically...

Honestly there are people out there who wouldn't believe the Earth went round the sun if the wrong person affirmed it.

But anyway - great that this article is out there at all.

I was very pleased to read this. In fact I wondered what was going on behind the scenes so to speak when I saw the professor's name on this letter in January along with Heather Brunskell-Evans, also a King's academic.
sites.google.com/view/open-letter-stock-freedom/home
The Law School Robert Wintemute works in is the home of the Future of Legal Gender project which is unsuccessfully trying to get rid of legal sex, something he describes now as outrageous (the idea, not the project). He sat in front of me at one of their open meetings back in 2019.

Its good to see him come out against this now, and I expect this will be quite influential. Admitting you forgot to consider women is pulling a big brick out of the wall.

And of course women (and mumsnet) made it absolutely clear to the FLAG project that we had to be considered, much to their chagrin.

Robert heard that feedback then at that meeting. Well done mumsnet.

“When you talk about trans women in toilets, well, many countries don’t have toilets, so how can that be a primary concern?”

You talk about the problems of obesity. Well, the population of many countries struggle to meet their daily caloric and nutritional needs so how can that be a primary concern.

Definitely makes sense.

What happened at the meeting was a fore runner of what's happened to institutions. A bunch of well meaning but unthinking people bamboozled by activists with an agenda to replace sex with gender identity. You would expect better of human rights experts.

I actually agree with this principle that it is wrong to force people to 'out' themselves, whether they are LGB or identify as transgender, when they may not wish to do so.

It seems that many TRAs disagree with this particular principle even though they might cite the Yogyakarta principles as an authority when it suits them. I am just drawing their attention to the fact that they seem to pick and choose which bits they want to agree with. I think it is hypocritical to say 'Yogyakarta principles represent international best practice' followed by 'you must out yourself by declaring pronouns'.

That's a coherent argument by professor muntabhorn 🤔

Vitit Muntarbhorn, international human rights expert and professor of law at Chulalongkorn University in Bangkok, is another of the original authors of the Principles. But unlike Wintemute he remains steadfast in his support for the notion of “gender identity” and does not accept that this has led to an erosion of women’s sex-based rights. “When you talk about trans women in toilets, well, many countries don’t have toilets, so how can that be a primary concern?”

Full list here:
yogyakartaprinciples.org/annex/

Is "The Critic" right wing though? I thought it was balanced