Let Women Speak Norwich - 08 Jun 2024, 13:00 – 15:00

Yes that’s true that it does pull lots of threads the same direction and derails the conversation, which is frustrating but hopefully at least not totally in vain!

I know it must be infuriating and tiring to have to repeatedly address the same (rubbish) points but as a newer member and most of the time a lurker, I just want to say it is so useful to see these points addressed time and time again for those less familiar with the arguments. So thank you @Helleofabore and @BezMills and @AlisonDonut and others for always taking the time to do it, I really do think it makes a huge difference.

Bez You have my compulsion nailed.

I just figured a few years back that I may as well let others see my workings as I seek to unpick just what causes the dissonance alarms to go off in my head. I also find it forces me to keep evaluating anything new. Hence I laugh constantly at the attempts to portray the regulars on this board as being the ones who are misinformed and who can’t change and adapt with new information.

Whereas you usually just blow the crap away with succinctness.

I can tell you sometimes find it hard to resist correcting false info, which is entirely to your credit @Helleofabore

I have that tendency too

So do those who have a thing about humiliation. One other of those likes to spice it up with name changes after varying periods of time away. But they too always return.

Profoundly stupid people are everywhere on the internet, and frankly, they're not my problem, and even if they were, I just don't have the time.

I know sinner.

But apparently, this decision should be celebrated.

One thing though about the poster trying to portray Helen’s words as being the problem rather than that decision and others like that decision, is that poster’s efforts back fire so much that the assumption that they are a sex realist plant has to valid. Because, every time, we have yet another opportunity to show the degree of harm that this ideological elevation of a philosophical belief over material reality has had and is having. Supposedly the very opposite of what the poster supposedly intends.

It is uncanny.

Helleofabore · Today 09:37

Can you explain how this should have been allowed? And I wonder if this is the clinic that you once started a thread on to praise one of the clinicians.

That judge is a fucking travesty, how could anyone vaguely rational conclude, publicly and in writing, that an adolescent girl who thought that taking testosterone would make her grow a penis was competent to take it?

And the doctor - how can he live with himself? Surely a doctor should explain treatments in terms comprehensible by any patient? Yet he just blithely carried on.

I know.

"Hey wims! I know you're discussing something rationally but can I just throw in a misquote/random opinion/bit of scolding to distract you all?"

I reckon most parents do. This is driven by activists - so many of them men, few of them parents, an alarming number with an interest in alienating children from their parents.
The worry is that some schools (and unions) have failed to exercise critical thinking and pay attention to the law and instead went along with the belief that safeguarding could be eroded by queer theory activism.

Just when I was thinking we were running short of high frequency high amplitude shitposting... a hero returns

Ah, dear old Mish. Never knowingly quoting something in the correct context

very much agree. I'd like to think any parent would.

Completely wrong & dangerous to give such incorrect advice.
Safeguarding is predicated on partnership with parents which is enshrined in legislation and guidance. Parents - even abusive parents - are involved and consulted at all stages in the safeguarding process with only the courts having the power to remove parental rights.
Schools have no legal right to keep secret that a child thinks their body is the wrong sex from parents. Decisions like this need multi agency discussions - not fearmongering about Section 28 and censorship. This is a tactic too often used by activists determined to disrupt the essential child / parent relationship for reasons best known to themselves. It needs to be challenged every time..

Here you are Mishy. I wonder if this is a good example of what illustrates Helen's point.

What medical doctor should allow a child would go ahead with treatment while that child believes that they will 'grow a functioning penis' by taking testosterone? That the child has given fully informed consent to the treatment while still holding this expectation.

Can you explain how this should have been allowed? And I wonder if this is the clinic that you once started a thread on to praise one of the clinicians.

https://x.com/Bernard_Lane/status/1800864778497441970

https://www.theaustralian.com.au/nation/doctors-defiance-on-childs-sex-swap/news-story/3fe1e0bf9daeecfe34c8b9810b583f57

Joyce's point was that when sanity returns and society stops believing trans people's disordered thinking about their sex means they have an actual inner cross sex personality that needs to be accomodated as the opposite sex, we will still be left with people who have made severe medical changes to their bodies in the expectation of "being" the opposite sex in society.

Those people will have to fit into a society that is no longer prepared to accept them as the opposite sex, and this is going to be emotionally and potentially practically difficult for them.

Joyce was expressing sympathy that while sanity needs to be restored, there will be nevertheless be a human cost for the people who have been caught up in the social mania of cross sex personalities.

And all this is done to the bodies of people who allegedly don't even have a medical condition.

It's not like they're even doing this to try to cure an illness.

Healthy people apparently need to be made into less healthy people (with the help of doctors) in order to 'live their best lives'.

How does that work then?

Ah, thanks @Helleofabore

That has saved me trawling through hours of interviews (although I always find Helen really interesting to listen to)

So my recollection was slightly off but broadly correct.

They absolutely FEAR the GCs who...tell the truth and don't come at them with drugs and scalpels.

Right ho buddy.

Oh... and great job dehumanising people who disagree with you yet again with 'the GCs'.

A sane world doesn't remove the genitals of people just because they like the 'wrong' clothes/have mental health issues/want it.

Sorry, to be clear, in the above, I am talking about taking a healthily functional body and making the person into a life long physical medical patient requiring often constant, but certainly frequent, medical treatment for the created medical condition/s.

Here is another.

In what 'sane world', does any clinician create a physical medical patient for life to treat a psychological condition? Particularly in a society where social health care is drastically under funded and under resourced and this treatment amounts to elective extreme body modification.

I mean, I am happy to keep listing the very issues that I believe that Helen Joyce was referring to. But I am just as keen to hear your detailed and evidenced answers.

And again you have chosen to twist what Helen Joyce actually said. Here it is:

"We can't win this by saying you know there's 60 x million people in this country and we've got to persuade all of them or a great majority of them. We've got to get through to the decision makers and in the meantime while we're trying to get through to the decision makers we have to try to limit the harm. And that means reducing or keeping down the number of people who transition and that's for two reasons. One of them is that every one of those people is a person who's been damaged."

"But the second one is every one of those people is basically, you know, a huge problem to a sane world. Like if you've got people that and whether they're transitioned whether they're happily transitioned, whether they're unhappily transitioned, whether they're de-transitioned. If you've got people who've dissociated from their sex in some way, every one of those people is someone who needs special accommodation."

"In a sane world where we re-acknowledge the the truth of sex and I mean the people who've been damaged by it. The children have been put through this. Those people deserve every accommodation we can possibly make but every one of them is a difficulty, yes. And I mean I know that sounds heartless.."

Do tell us mishy:

In a 'sane' world, why are male children sleeping in the same rooms as female children thereby lowering the safeguarding standards for those female children?

In a 'sane' world, should a male child be getting undressed in a shared changing space as female children? And how is this robust safeguarding?

In a 'sane' world, why are male people competing in female sporting events thereby decreasing safety, fairness and opportunity for female people?

In a 'sane' world why is any one undergoing extreme body modifications, with a a very high failure rate and regret rate, just to cope with everyday life, without extensive and of very long duration therapy before they ever make such a decision.

In a 'sane' world, how is puberty, a 'natural' body process that is vital for maturation of humans (including brain development) considered something to be stopped and substituted with artificial hormones. Artificial hormones that cause damage to the body because those hormones are not healthy for a person of that sex category. How is it 'sane' to tell children that they are going through the 'wrong' puberty? And how is it 'sane' that an environment of fear of natural puberty has been so created?

Let's have a discussion that you can bring your evidence to, evidence to support your claims.

See. You declare that her 'sane world' comment is based on some intention of hatred. No. Her 'sane' world is about making sure children are properly protected and not medicalised, and that all people have the care and the opportunities that they need.

Not that women and children have been de prioritised.

And that no person in this world is forced in some way to have to lie to make others happy. No one has to lie to subvert the truth under threat of job or any opportunity loss, loss of loved ones under any duress, including guilt and emotional manipulation. Because how sane is a world where people are punished for speaking the truth. For following the proven science that there is no materially real way for any human on this planet to change sex. And that sex needs to prioritised in many situations, not someone's gender identity.