What's going on with Genspect?

I did consider quoting Lang yesterday. But thought it would be pointless.

I don't know who you are talking to, but from my point of view I'd LOVE 'Ms O'Malley' to take down WPATH. I don't have antipathy I have concerns that they are going too fast and not taking stock.

My worry is that they are in danger of replicating the same format of being an international hodge podge of interested parties, and that they are not taking safeguarding seriously.

And that it isn't clear what they are trying to be.

You can't think that we haven't listened to A Wider Lens pretty much weekly for the last few years? Surely not. Otherwise we'd not be able to spot the flaws.

Pointing out that there is a blind spot isn't being mean, it is actually being kind.

A plant working for who?

I think those criticising Genspect here in this corner of the internet might want to ask themselves, why didn't they set up a pioneering organisation, which brings people together to challenge WPATH?

Primarily its not an organisation to bring people together to challenge WPATH, its an organisation designed to influence how children and young people are cared for.

They may use WPATH as a 'how not to do it' model, but thats not their aim.

As an organisation that is promoting itself as experts in caring for children, i have every right to question their attitude to safeguarding. Its madness that someone would say otherwise on a patenting forum.

Whatever you think of Genspect the issues around safeguarding are a concern and should not be brushed aside, no matter how insignificant some may feel them to be.

As the late of this parish Langcleg would never tire of reminding us "No sacred castes!" and that includes those who are ostensibly on our "side".

When safeguarding issues are raised it's time to reflect, not jump to an immediate defence of the person/organisation being "attacked".

Every time this happens I just hear "But Sgt. Brown would never do something like that, he's a policeman!" or "Don't say that about Father David, he's a man of God!".

No sacred castes. Ever.

Yes as far as you can see. As far as I can see, no. I don't think they've given reasons to be trusted and I don't think either Genspect or WPATH benefit UK children. So there we are.

Genspect is not aiming to replace WPATH. they are as critical of WPATH as you are, as far as I can see. I think your antipathy to Ms O'Malley might be clouding your reason.

Of course, WPATH needs to be exposed and closed down. It's part of what Genspect is trying to do, as far as I can see. Have you listened to various podcasts from "Gender: A Wider Lens"? Their pulling apart of WPATH is fiery!

A plant? No. Just someone who can sense bullshit a mile off.

I don't have the same kind of time that you do and I feel like you are definitely a plant okay I know you work for them

Why would replacing the organisation which has brought zero benefit to UK children, be A Good Thing?

WPATH should be fully exposed and shut down. Proponents of WPATH must be fully investigated. We don't need a WPATH v 2. That's got to be the last thing UK children need.

That's why.

@2fallsfromSSA Did you ever receive a response to your open letter to Professor Arif Ahmed?

I think those criticising Genspect here in this corner of the internet might want to ask themselves, why didn't they set up a pioneering organisation, which brings people together to challenge WPATH?

It's easy to be critical on a thread on MN, not so easy to set up an international organisation which asks questions about WPATH, and gives sound advice to parents of gender-questioning children, and pushes back against the blanket mantra of "gender affirmative care."

Be brave, set up you own organisation. Risk your livelihood.

Purest garbage, based on a wilful misunderstanding of my posts as regards Genspect and their post attacking people who ask how they’re funded and who funds them.

UK parties’ accounts are on the Electoral Commission page, charities’ accounts are on the Charity Commission page, and universities publish their own. This is all to be expected. Other organisations (retail, trade etc) absolutely do publish their own accounts!

It is not too much to ask that instead of attacking people with questions, they’re open and transparent (as I’ve now said a number of times now and not sure I can bear repeating it all again).

This lack of transparency as well as a lack of reflection about welcoming an AGP is what = red flags. In particular, their lack of reflection is the most concerning thing. But some people refuse to see this. Fine. So long as they don’t work with children or vulnerable adults, or draft policy or provide advice to politicians, I guess.

I’m not going to type all this out again. I’m done with having to make the same point.

I've honestly never known a single organisation - charitable, political, academic or anything else - that publishes its accounts on its website. You're making up problems here that don't exist.

This might also be a good place to share our open letter to Professor Arif Ahmed, Director for Freedom of Speech and Academic Freedom at the Office for Students, to raise concerns relating to the influence of experimental academic discourse on public policy.

safeschoolsallianceuk.net/2023/11/13/academic-experiments-and-child-safeguarding/

We'll soon see if I get deleted I suppose. And if I do, further evidence of the systematic dismantling of SG.

Are we allowed to talk about grooming on here now? A year or two ago, posts mentioning grooming were being deleted. (As were those that mentioned AGP, so things seemed to have changed recently.)

Gosh, grooming. I remember when we used to talk about that here, and when the nation even started to have some awareness of what it is.

We've been going in the wrong direction for a while, and we must get back to having these conversations.

I know - that's why I asked about it when I went to A Woman's Place back in 2019.

This.

1000 x this.

"Maybe some posters are just inexperienced in the world of research and debate over research."

Wow, how patronizing. I think you will find that many posters here are well-versed in research and the debate over research. But what we are dealing with here is the widespread and institutionalized grooming of a generation of children. Many of them, as adults, will never have a functioning sex life, have children, or lead a normal life let alone get their bodies back to any kind of pre-op state. They were let down badly by those who should have protected them. There can be as many conferences and academic debates as you like on the concept of "gender" but until any organization involved with helping children experiencing "gender" distress understands this ideology as an organized, strategic attack on children then they will fail. How anyone believes that understanding the mind or perspective of the adult AGP will help girls and boys who have been groomed into believing they have been born in the wrong body is beyond me. These children have most likely been affirmed by every professional they ever meet (health, MH, social workers, teachers) and their parents signposted to the likes of Mermaids. They have never had a chance to explore why they were feeling this way - normal safeguarding protocols have been thrown out of the window, children are not being helped and this has not happened by accident. This is not about understanding "gender" and "academic debate" this is about recognizing that the massive leap in referrals to gender clinics over the last 10 years is because children have been groomed and all of the agencies who should have noticed and protected those children colluded in the grooming. Once you give too much credence to the concept of "gender identity" then you have demonstrated your lack of understanding about the reality of what has occurred.

This is why people on this thread are banging on so much about safeguarding

Apologies @AlisonDonut I did t mean to insinuate nobody joined our call for a PI, many, many did and lots of people completely understand the SG concerns. There are some highly knowledgeable women on n this thread alone.

My more general point was that as a movement there has been very little understanding of SG and if that had been the driver for much of the push back against gender ideology we would not be where we are now.

The whole gamut of you tubers, ex gender medics, professional whistle blowers, grievance study peer review ex university lecturers, twitter files investigators and not one thinks 'hang on, we need to ensure safeguarding, transparency and what our end game or exit plan is here'?

This thread has given over and over, what’s wrong with their approach. No I will not pay to find out what they should be making public. One more time: they could have chosen full transparency. They chose to play the man not the ball instead.

Anyone who cannot see what is wrong with how they handled the issue at the time and since, is exactly why we need safeguarding.

Of course it must be at the forefront. It isn’t. If it was, they’d not have an AGP there. And they’d have listened to people who pointed out the issues with this at the time. They’d have reflected. It is that simple.