Have Feminists reclaimed the word "slut"?

Dr Christina Richards, the transwoman who led the creation of this document, is also a former member of WPATH and has previously said that detranstition rates are very low and detransitioners will "fully" retransition.

Is this acceptable from the chair of a group producing guidelines for providing therapy to people with gender dyphoria? It appears to be wishful thinking rather than evidence-based.

twitter.com/4th_WaveNow/status/1146769215426387972?s=20

The guidelines also endorse the Memorandum of Understanding on Conversion Therapy which Transgender Trend has questioned: www.transgendertrend.com/ukcp-memorandum-of-understanding-conversion-therapy/

GlorianaCervixia:
The working group that created this document is led by a trans woman

That explains it. I find that TW tend to have very little insight into what women are like and what is important to us. Curious, that.

Of course not. Also, you can't really reclaim a word, if enough other people still use it in the original meaning, there's nothing you can do.

Given the two examples, sounds like ‘lesbians’ with penises using therapy for validation and to indulge their fetish.

Women have not reclaimed ‘slut’, it is an abusive term still used IRL and all over the internet to abuse and shame women. The people calling themselves sluts are AGP men as part of their sissy fetish (who have no right to reclaim the word) and people who use it within the kink scene within a bdsm context (so it’s still being used pejoratively but with consent). The ‘Slutwalks’ were NOT reclaiming the word but presenting a show of defiance against it and drawing attention to how often women are abused/shamed/judged/victim-blamed for what they wear etc.

To be successfully ‘reclaimed’ it would need to have been redefined and simultaneously be considered unusable/offensive by men. Men are still using it freely to denigrate women, oh, and another group of men are now using it as part of their vile interpretation of ‘womanhood’.

It’s horrifying seeing so many key organisations so overtly captured by this ideology.

Ah so Its nothing to do with feminism, its about men acting out their fetish during therapy?

Okay, I see no issues. Nothing to see here.

'Slut' has never had a positive connotation so it can't be 'reclaimed' as positive but some may attempt to claim it. But historical linguistics is not on the side of creating a positive connotation because the history of nouns to describe women usually go from positive >> negative connotations over time, not the other way round. Creating a positive connotation for 'slut' is a utopian dream imo.

Sorry - bad link for YT. You can search for them though!

Transgender Trend have made public their letter to UKCP on the Memorandum of Understanding on conversion therapy, which now includes gender identity:
www.transgendertrend.com/ukcp-memorandum-of-understanding-conversion-therapy/

You may find this discussion interesting - Billboard Chris and Maxime Bernier, of the People's Party if Canada, discussing situation in Canada and the anti-'conversion therapy bill going through there at the moment -
www.youtube.com › watch
The Max Bernier Show — Ep 66: Billboard Chris - YouTube

Working group led by male who IDs as woman and the word slut is given as an example of a word that a patient might want to be used in reference to them.

I see.

Not a word I would ever use to describe either myself or another woman.

The working group that created this document is led by a trans woman.

I suspect this is really about the conversion therapy bills being created around the world. The idea is to embed into clinical practice that clinicians must accept that the client is whatever they say they are and the clinician must use the client's language. Not a coincidence that the examples given are about women and one example is obviously dehumanising.

It's a trojan horse for affirmation-only therapy, no exceptions.

I mean bottom line-

Describing conversion therapy as 'the term for therapy that does xyz'

They are fucking therapists are they not?
If they see this as one area of therapy then why do they see it as important to ban?

It's being banned essentially to make a point that these practices are unacceptable here.

They seem to think that it's being proposed as a ban because being homosexual is aok and it's not right that a person would feel conflicted and seek therapy with... What? A therapist like they are?

Man committed suicide:
'Their reaction was to tell him to go to a psychiatrist [to be 'cured' of being gay]. They treated him like he was a disease who needed to be removed from that family,"'

Note: His family were the issue. Their beliefs. No help there from ban on conversion therapy.

Suicide:
'The man’s son wrote two suicide notes – one to his father and one to his boyfriend. The conversion therapist showed Nicolson the suicide note, in which the deceased boy pleaded with his father to “understand his anguish”.

“He couldn’t reconcile his certainty that he’d been born gay with the church’s teachings, and he implored his dad to befriend his boyfriend and learn acceptance,”'

Rape:
'Paterson was 19. She knew she was a lesbian, but as a Christian in an evangelical church, she had been taught what this meant: total incompatibility with her faith and an eternity in hell...
When Donald learned that the 19-year-old had become homeless, he invited her to live with him and his wife at the manse, the pastor’s residence near the church. It was 1990. For the next four years, says Paterson, she was under his control. At first, Donald sent her to a therapist to try to make her straight. When that didn’t work, he began abusing her to try to “heal” her.

“When I’d wake up and he was there,” she says – he would be standing by her bed – “that wasn’t… I didn’t consent. I didn’t have a choice. Because of the power that he had.”'

The definition of conversion therapy is very strange as well. (I'm referring to gay conversion therapy here. A very well documented practice, although ** I don't know how common it is here.)

Their wording waters down what is going on. Inferior is too weak.

It's about hatred, evil, disgust, abhorrence. It's about believing that homosexuality usually with particular revulsion for gay men, but lesbians obv also targeted. ***

The govt consultation uses the word abhorrent.

Conversion therapy can include-
Rape
Deprivation of various types (food, kept in seclusion etc)
Physical violence
Distressing / dangerous rituals, treatments etc. With religion can be related to ideas about being possessed, having Satan inside... Clearly measures to free them aren't going to be pleasant.
Psychological damage from the point above as well as the obvious
And more for sure.

This org states:

'Conversion therapy is the term for therapy that assumes certain sexual orientations or gender identities are inferior to others, and seeks to change or suppress them on that basis.'

Let's try that again shall we?

'Conversion therapy is the term for practices that are unwarranted, and frequently result in psychological damage, and can include physical damage.

Conversion therapy is enacted by those who believe certain sexual orientations, or failure to adhere to often highly constrained (sex) gender roles. The aim is a wholesale and permanent alteration of their sexuality, remove any trace of non conformity to their prescribed gender (sex) role.

** The govt doc has no stats data etc on gay or gender conversion here, they use stats from mainly USA which is obviously a totally different ball game.
I have massive issues around my opinion that a targeted data based approach would be the best.
This law is vv unlikely to change anything in practice for the basically religious groups that do this stuff.

***(I would guess that bisexual people just hope that they don't fall for someone same sex for safety or get found out so really is it the conversion therapy that's the only problem? What about the things that go hand in hand? Misogyny, males leaders females subservient, men women boys girls conforming to incredibly narrow roles with severe penalties for straying outside...
And hello LGBTQ+ orgs!
Care to tell me what the fuck you're doing about all that?
As long as homosexual and bisexual people hide their sexuality for whole life, marry have children as expected, espouse revulsion of their own orientation... That's ok? Only prob if conversion therapy? Which we don't know any stats for?
Have YOU looked into this?
The vv strict religious group I know round here. Fuck conversion therapy.
Step wrong? You get expelled.
Consequence? Can be suicide. Lose everything you know, not equipped for outside world, lose you family friends. Spouse children. Your whole community. Your home job everything.
What are you doing about that eh?
Oh yeah nothing because you're never going to go near those types of communities because oooh complicated could be bad press... FFS.

Of someone wants you to use the word - sound more like a s&m session…

I am a psychologist. And no, I would never use that term or other equally offensive ones in therapy. If someone explicitly asked me to use that term about them (and guess what in 25+ years of clinical practice no-one has) I would be exploring and formulating with them the reasons why…

I truly despair of my professional body. After last years racism now this….

I have been asked in the past by someone to refer to them as ‘the Messiah’. I did not for obvious reasons. And no, he wasn’t a particularly ‘naughty boy’…

The issue I have with this is that the guidance recommends using the terms that clients use about themselves (OR — but only as as a second option— to ask the client what they prefer), and while a lot of the time it'll be fine to do so, sometimes it really, really won't be.

There are plenty of types of descriptor that are only okay applied to oneself, or sometimes to another with whom you share a characteristic and who is also happy to apply it to themselves, but which are not okay when used for those people by someone who doesn't share that descriptor. This kind of insider language includes colloquialisms, reclaimed slurs, and insulting terminology, none of which belong in the mouth of a professional the vast majority of the time. Even if the professional would, in their private life, be an insider and "qualify" to use the term, when they're in the professional role it's not usually appropriate for them to say it, due to power differentials and other complex shit.

If I refer to myself as "a mental" (insider language used by some communities of people with mental health problems) in my therapy sessions because it's quick and easy and references the discrimination I experience and I find the mild self-deprecation amusing, I do so knowing that my therapist isn't socially "allowed" to join in with my insider language. Sometimes at least part of its purpose for me might be to gently remind my therapist that in her official role, she is an outsider, by using a word we both know she "can't" use.

A more small-scale version of insider language is things that one is "allowed" to say about oneself but not about other people e.g. if I have a friend who jokingly refers to himself as a fat bastard, I most definitely should not take that as a green light to describe him that way myself.

I think it's possibly okay to use "unprofessional" language if the client specifically requests it, like, "You keep saying "lesbian" but I think of myself as a dyke, could you use that instead?" or whatever, but therapists definitely shouldn't assume that just because a client uses a word, they want the therapist to use it too.

It's like these psychologists have forgotten how the subtleties of language work.

They're psychologists which somehow makes it even worse.

It's diabolical isn't it, reclaiming slut but losing woman? I suppose as slut is inherently female many transwomen would get a kick out of calling themselves little sluts.

I know there has been an atrempt by kids at my teen’s school to reclaim ‘fgot’ and the call each other that*

Dafuq

No thank you... but can we reclaim the word woman please?

Yes please?

No thank you... but can we reclaim the word woman please?

I know there has been an atrempt by kids at my teen’s school to reclaim ‘f*got’ and the call each other that despite my teen asking constantly that they stop calling them that.

I remember my teen first using baitches. That resulted in a conversation where I laid out just how privileged all the calls were who believed they were ‘reclaiming’ it. And how ridiculous it was. And that celebrities were leading the way, when the word was still being used to abuse women who had no hope of escaping such abuse.

How kind and tolerant was that, I asked?

So, yeah. BPS can get in the bin with this. And I think their deliberate choice of misogynistic words rather than just homophobic male equivalents is rather telling that they know very well which sex they are appeasing. If you know what I mean.

therefore it would be appropriate to address a client as such if that were their preference.

I don't understand this. Why would a psychiatrist be addressing a client in this way?

"Hello, doctor. I'm here for my therapy."

"Morning, slut. Please take a seat."

??

I’m still curious who they asked - or more likely who demanded this. Where are the grown ups?

It is my most hated word. I would say cunt till the cows come home but slut is by very definition sexist. It's the one word, along with racist words, I would never use. It didn't need to be reclaimed, it needs to be banished.