What's going on with Genspect?

"If the GC community had come at this issue from a safeguarding perspective rather than a rights/beliefs one we would be in a very different position."

This.

Safeguarding should be front and centre - everything else will follow from that.

Right. So there are accounts. But they're nowhere to be seen on the Genspect site. And you have to pay to access them.

Sorry but can they not see how this looks? Parents have been tearing their hair out with shadowy organisations hiding things from them as regards gender ideology. Children have been harmed. Detransitioners have been trashed.

Any organisation that purports to be a good solution to this and especially one which has directly (supposedly) challenged WPATH has to be transparent.

This isn't transparency.

Why are you saying there are no accounts published?
They have to submit accounts like everyone else.

https://core.cro.ie/e-commerce/company/search/4962362

Yes it is. But academic conferences are run by professional associations with memberships, academic publications, education programmes etc. The costs of running conferences in lovely locations are extremely high I grant you but I'm not sure you can compare them with academic conferences.

We were very disappointed in the lack of public support for a public inquiry from many organisations.

So much sense being talked on this thread by @ResisterRex @WarriorN and others who clearly understand safeguarding.

Any organisation which is involved with children in whatever capacity needs to have safeguarding principles embedded throughout.

If the GC community had come at this issue from a safeguarding perspective rather than a rights/beliefs one we would be in a very different position.

Rather than how can they afford to run conferences, are the conferences funding Genspect? Its nearly €100 for an online ticket, and €500 in person.

Pretty normal registration fees for academic conferences in the field.

If organisations make money from charging to attend their conferences as a general rule, fine. But that still doesn't tell us how Genspect is funded. So far we know parents of distressed children fund them but not to what degree or how that is used. And we can speculate that they are making some money from this conference. However, as there are no accounts published for them, we don't know what difference - if any - that would make to their baseline.

Look how FWR is interested in Stonewall and Mermaids' accounts. Why would Genspect (who seem to have come roaring out of nowhere) be any different? They are no different. Perhaps though, the fact SOM is a mandated reporter is an important difference in respect of the other key issue - their approach to child safeguarding.

TLDR: we're still no further along with them.

Practically every medical conference is like this. Select a venue. Open registration. Charge a fee to pay for costs of conference and probably add a bit to coffers. Remember it’s in Lisbon because WPATH’s conference is in Lisbon at the same time. And I wonder if Lionel Shriver is appearing for free or for a fee.

I’m thinking of every academic conference or professional association conference I’ve been invited to. They all cost money to attend.

I’m in full agreement with this. Reflection is needed. Not a leap to another unknown international approach.

Another thing I cannot get my head around is the lack of self reflection about what is happening here.

I am totally on board with defeating WPATH. And burying them. But what is the end game here?

A worldwide professional association of gender health therapists? WPAGHT?

Interesting. What other conferences are like this, @nutmeg7? It would be interesting to see. And to see how they explain their finances too.

It’s a normal model for professional / medical / science conferences, before anyone decides this is further evidence of a conspiracy.

This is a good point. What are people helping create?

Dated 2 June 2024 however, is this wretched word salad. To save you the bother, it tells you nothing apart from that anyone who dares to ask how an organisation (about which there is no financial information published) can possibly afford the upcoming 3-day jaunt to Lisbon is instantly labelled a "conspiracy theorist"

Rather than how can they afford to run conferences, are the conferences funding Genspect? Its nearly €100 for an online ticket, and €500 in person.

They are challenging WPATH and I'm not going to take that away from them.

But Genspect is to an extent the same model as WPATH which is the issue.

There hasn't been any other area of healthcare that has a body like WPATH for good reason; it's based on ideas.

Other professional medical bodies are made up of medical professionals. From what I understand, you may have charities which work separately, under those bodies, who may lobby / raise awareness of the issues. They may have contact with families but they don't treat. They'll sign post but to the medical evidence set out by the professional body, who are trained to focus on what is the current evidence and best practice.

WPATH had some medical professionals who were very biased and some who weren't more than extremely ideologically driven parents of kids. You've now got some of those parents doing phds in order to generate papers for WPATH to refer to. (Eg Cal Horton.) WPATH clearly generates its own evidence base. (Cant remember the term.)

At the very least Genspect is drawing from the sparse but growing evidence that opposes WPATH but as said countless times on this thread, when dealing with children and health, safeguarding must be the priority. They're trying to do too many things.

Cass was significant as it was independent.

Safeguarding isn't ideologically driven. It's based on evidence of harm.

They'll call you a conspiracy theorist...

They're not. They don't say who funds them. Their approach to that is to say they happily take money from distressed parents (but not how much, or what it's used on) and to attack questions on this.

Their safeguarding approach (to us that loosely) divests them of any responsibility.

We don't know their structure, their funding, their responsibilities and who they talk to in the UK government, politics, or internationally.

Whatever they are and whoever funds them, they are not a child safeguarding organisation. I see struggle to see the benefit to the UK children in them.

(My post in response to They're trying to be (a replacement) WPATH I think?)

But that's the safeguarding nightmare of WPATH; people without medical backgrounds organised themselves and in the absence of any real science, made it up.

Can anyone think of other bodies equivalent to WPATH in other areas of healthcare?
It has always frustrated me that trans health always reinvents the wheel. We already have systems for making tricky ethical decisions in paediatric care, whereas the push in trans youth care has always been to do things differently now, use a completely different risk / benefit or care / autonomy framework (or whatever) to oncology, or plastics, or every other field of healthcare.
I'd say what needs to happen in trans healthcare and education is get rid of the lobbyists altogether. Just let medicine and psychology and other modalities proceed without agendas, the way they do with other diseases / forms of human suffering / .

They're trying to be (a replacement) WPATH I think?

But I don't think Genspect is a child safeguarding organisation. I'm not entirely sure what they are, who funds them or what their real purpose is.

They're very clear about what they are. From their website:

Genspect is an international, non-partisan, interdisciplinary professional and educational organisation devoted to advancing a healthy approach to sex and gender. Our team and members strive to promote high-quality, evidence-based care for gender-nonconforming individuals all around the world.

It's not their responsibility that a bunch of people here somehow got it into their heads that they're something else, and then judged them for failing to live up to an agenda that was never theirs in the first place.

I went back to the Genspect website to see if there is anything on there about how they're funded and there isn't.

Dated 2 June 2024 however, is this wretched word salad. To save you the bother, it tells you nothing apart from that anyone who dares to ask how an organisation (about which there is no financial information published) can possibly afford the upcoming 3-day jaunt to Lisbon is instantly labelled a "conspiracy theorist"

https://genspect.org/who-funds-genspect/

Perhaps their position has shifted now

Given the noticeable lack of support for a public inquiry into the collapse of safeguarding from these kinds of organisations, I'd say no. No it hasn't.