Trans activism on retreat - Sarah Ditum, Sunday Times

I'm not sure whether the tide is turning but things are changing. Look at the nature of the discussions happening in the public realm (not just on Mumsnet or tucked away in other corners) and compare it to 3 years ago. Look at the BBC. Maybe it's a token on their part or maybe they're going to start attempting a degree of impartiality.

These days someone standing up and asking questions does cause an almighty row with people pitching in with different perspectives (an example of this from today: www.thetimes.co.uk/article/richard-dawkins-race-is-a-spectrum-sex-is-pretty-damn-binary-hrjz95kqn) while 3 years back it would cause an immediate silence (well, there'd be the ranting on twitter etc), the offender would be denounced and people would back away, and the topic would be swiftly changed.

I’m referring to the screenshot in this post.
Thanks for the article - so clear and succinct.

I think one thing is changing. At least in the UK. I only noticed these discussions after JK Rowling was attacked on Twitter. In contrast to that period, the power of #nodebate is diminishing. There is more mainstream media coverage. Disagreement is emerging into the public arena. Pile-ons are not the automatically suppressive done deal they used to be. Perpetrators get kick back. At least discussion is possible. And I thank all the women here (and elsewhere) who have worked so hard to make that possible.

Most of us believe the whole idea of gender identity is ludicrous, so you can't talk someone out of something you don't believe exists.

If 'gender identity' is going to be written into law, it needs a clear definition.

On another thread last night (the cisisnotaslur one) we had a new poster telling us (yet again) what gender identity isn't (according to them it's not the same as gender expression and it's not about stereotypes). But as is always the case with these posters, as soon as they were asked 'well what is it then?' they disappeared. Because they can't define it in any other way than feelings about gender woo.

The government need to come up with something better than this transactivist line about what it isn't, and better than the Yogyakarta definition which is a mix of feelings, stereotypes and expression:

each person’s deeply felt internal and individual experience of gender, which may or may not correspond with the sex assigned at birth, including the personal sense of the body (which may involve, if freely chosen, modification of bodily appearance or function by medical, surgical or other means) and other expressions of gender, including dress, speech and mannerisms;

There is nothing there which tells me how I would know what my 'gender identity' is or convinces me that I have one.

I really think we have to wait and see with this conversion therapy bill. I can't believe that Truss would want to pass a bill that stops people advocating a "watchful waiting" approach with children with gender dysphoria, given that she has already told schools they can't tell children they were born in the wrong body. Assuming gender identity is going to be in there, there are three options:

1. Banning people from telling kids they are trans, or encouraging them to be trans - basically putting an end to the affirmation model.
2. Banning people from telling trans kids that they are not trans.
3. Banning both telling trans kids that they aren't trans, and non-trans kids that they are trans.

I think that all three would be difficult to pass into law, but especially 2 and 3, because if you don't believe there is such a thing as a trans kid in the first place, how can you be accused of persuading them that they are not trans? Most of us believe the whole idea of gender identity is ludicrous, so you can't talk someone out of something you don't believe exists.

I'm afraid I'm a bit pessimistic too. I am concerned about how much our public services are in thrall to Stonewall Law and too much evidence exists that these services are reluctant to disassociate. I think that the CPS is no longer on Stonewalls list but I read that it doesn't matter because another department has taken over their HR (one that no one will notice the bias). The calls for evidence on conversion therapy is also throwing up some conflicts.

Perhaps I should be more positive, after all Liz Truss heads up the department and she says no child will be subject to Hormone or cross sex hormone therapy. We also have some great allies in Parliament, so any bill will have to undergo their scrutiny

The proposed ban is a trojan horse to get gender identity onto the statue books

How are they going to do that when they can't even define what a gender identity is? Because I don't think they have defined it in the consultation documents. If they have and I've missed it, can someone post a link to where the definition is?

While there’s slips of sanity here and there at times these aren’t a magic wand and require a disproportionate amount of energy by us to make them effective (schools still ignoring the v clear d of e guidance for example).

And there’s still the extreme, unquestioning, quixotically delusional views growing strong with followers also.

Even if the 5 year old calls you mummy what’s the fucking problem? As long as everyone else is calling you he why the hell does it matter

Very upsetting

Who knew that 1970s working men’s club comedians were writing the script for the gender revolution all along?
So many brilliant lines in this article but this one really resonated.

For the proponents of gender ideology, being cool and reasonable only makes a woman more dangerous: if she can’t be dismissed as a raging hysteric, people may even listen to her.

Yes!!!

Thanks for the article. She is a very good writer isn’t she. I believe she’s working on a book with the same publisher as Helen Lewis.

That screenshot can't be for real, can it? Because if so, Christ. That's child abuse right there

Trying to force a child to go along with something they know isn't true is bad enough but to put him in therapy because he just wants his mum is horrific.

I don't think the tide is turning. The TRA's wanted laws changed before everyone woke up to what they were actually demanding, which has happened in many countries, but there are too many in high places and too many making a lot of money from it. It's a MRA movement and the men still have all the power. They have redefined our sex class because they could. The lived reality of billions of women is just fantasy to them. Meaningless. Nothing.

My concern isn't about the few shouty activists, it's about all the deals going on behind the scenes that are still happening. The fact that all the chairs and trustees from the big players are all connected and protected.

We have a long way to go.

The mermaids line shows that she doesn't understand the proposed conversion therapy ban. Not a criticism as most people don't.

The proposed ban is a trojan horse to get gender identity onto the statue books and according to solicitors (who have studied it from a legal perspective) it would ban exploration with a young lesbian or gay person. If this becomes law, groups can issue 'conversion therapy protection orders' CTPO's to stop anyone exploring what circumstances led the young lesbian or gay person to believe they are trans. For example a lesbian who is continually asked if she's 'trans' at school, who has straight people in the LGBT youth group tell her they think she's trans, who has straight male moderators in lesbian subreddits controlling her speech, correcting 'wrong think', telling her that same-sex attraction is 'transphobic'. A lesbian who has had friends send her links to Youtube (Jammi Dodger), articles and tik toks saying "this reminds me of you". A young lesbian who is told lesbians are T**Fs as bad as racists and will be ostracised from their friendship groups and society. A lesbian who is told by adults that 'everyone has a gender' and friends point to where they think she is on the 'spectrum'. If a lesbian then identifies as transgender her parents or counsellors will feel threatened with criminal charges for asking if she's a lesbian. Groups like Gendered Intelligence got 'gender identity' added to the bill to stop exploration and watchful waiting for any young person who believes they have a gender identity.

It was on @ripnutmeg's Twitter feed, @vanishun, and she seemed convinced it was genuine. Vocal activist from Florida, apparently.

yup. people aren't misogynistic bullies because they're transactivists, they's transactivists because they're misogynistic bullies.

the whole thing makes total sense to sexists

Excellent article. I hope she's right.

Thanks duvet that does look interesting. Halfway through the first one.

Sarah Ditum is a skilled writer and that's a well written piece.

The tide is not turning. I think she's mistaken about the true intent of this consultation.

I shall use a modified version of Ditum's on point description of Mermaids whenever I can: controversial lobbying group, Stonewall and child transitioning lobbyists, Mermaids.

'If you’re looking for a middle way between trans rights and feminism, Stock has mapped the route, driven there in advance and set up at the other end with a picnic, waiting for you to join her. It wasn’t good enough. For the proponents of gender ideology, being cool and reasonable only makes a woman more dangerous: if she can’t be dismissed as a raging hysteric, people may even listen to her.'

Wow, thanks for sharing the article OP.

That screenshot can't be for real, can it? Because if so, Christ. That's child abuse right there.