Until we organise as well as the transactivists we're not going to stem the problem

[dorade]

Everyone, regardless of race, creed or sex is entitles to the same human rights.

I have three issues with much of the current trans ideology:

1. The erosion of women's spaces, sports, achievements and quotas by biological males who wish to identify as females.

1. The transing (and therefore subjection to lifelong medical treatments, invasive surgery and potential sterilisation) of children for failure to comply with societally-imposed gender norms.

1. The erasure of lesbians, either by transing of potentially lesbian girls or by transwomen claiming to be lesbians.

The trans lobby is vocal and well funded. They have found an enormously soft target in schools/government/social care, all of whom unsurprisingly associate transgender with gay and lesbian issues and don't want to repeat the bigotry that gay and lesbian people were (and are) subjected to. Identity is not the same as sexual orientation. A person's sexual orientation treads on no-one else's rights. The same cannot be said for gender identity.

When articles, such as the recent transgender rapist one, appear in the press, the vast majority of comments show that the public is not fooled. Yet people keep quiet so as not to appear bigoted, thus allowing the movement to steamroller on at the expense of women and children.

I believe that the main target for opposition should be in our schools. Organisations such as Gires and Gendered Intelligence distribute material that promotes ideas such as pink and blue brains and that any child can choose whether to be a girl or a boy to impressionable children, backed up by teachers. Opposition to this is needed and it is not happening in any concerted way. I think a backlash has every chance of succeeding as there is huge latent support for it.

The average person in the street knows little to nothing of trans issues, but is likely to believe that a transwoman will have had his penis removed. The fact that in 2 weeks' time the Government is going to be debating replacing sex with gender identity as a protected characteristic is way off the radar of 99% of the population.

Mumsnet is brilliant in debating these issues, but we need to take it to the next level.

Isn't gender relevant with past crimes though? If male & violent crime likelyhood is that male pattern violence, if female then more likely is self defence against a man (statisticly iirc) & iirc disclosures come in different types/depths (can't use words today) so a mtt who passes could explain away predatory violence towards woman as self defence & be believed. If name & gender not shown then prospective employer (thinking the likes of disabled person who is self employing a carer who has minimal choices of applicants & therefore v vulnerable) can't Google the details & make an informed choice. Gender plays a role in nature of crime & hiding that deceives people

The trans lobby has a vested interest in promoting non psychological treatment, and politically they have successfully worked to have it declassified as a mental health condition

"but the trans activists seem to absolutely reject any suggestion that someone who feels like they don't match the sex of their given body is in any way "disordered". "

Then it's a lifestyle choice. That's find just don't expect any access to female only spaces

This is where I become very confused. If it is a disorder, I can understand the logic of the NHS funding treatment (not saying I support, but follow the logic).

If it is not, and is an identity issue (which seems to be the accepted view, Women and Equalities report on Transgender Equality agrees with this view, and self-identification legislation would be based on this) then why is treatment under the NHS available?

Is there any other "identity" treatment that the NHS funds?

Flo, yes. Let's all identify as being disabled. Blue badges all round please!

*This is where I become very confused. If it is a disorder, I can understand the logic of the NHS funding treatment (not saying I support, but follow the logic).

If it is not, and is an identity issue (which seems to be the accepted view, Women and Equalities report on Transgender Equality agrees with this view, and self-identification legislation would be based on this) then why is treatment under the NHS available?*

^^Yes. So much of the 'logic' makes no sense. Also the gender and sex argument. If sex is one thing and gender is another and both are fixed but not necessarily matching then why do you need a 'gender reassignment' certificate? You're arguing that you've always been that gender so why does it need to be reassigned and why do you need a certificate?

Wobbly paedsexual? Meaning? In case I am making an incorrect assumption. I don't want to google.

Peadosexual as in adults (men) who think having sex with children is a sexuality that should be accepted under lgb umbrella

Lots of groups of them link up on social media. TRA's are cover for them.

Paedophilia sanitised?

They've tried to do it before. PIE.

There aee a number of pro paedophilia organisation out there, NAMBLA etc

They use the once upon a time homosexuality was shuned & now accepted arguement

Salon ran a really nauseating pity piece by one a couple of years ago, claiming he was a benign paedophile because he didn't do anything with it and it was a sexual orientation like being gay. There was a thread about it here and some people bought it. Salon appear to have deleted the piece from their archives now.

He was quite happy to hang out with online paedophiles who did abuse children though, because he felt "excluded" by the rest of society.

My lips tremble, as my eyes fill with tears

It's everywhere though, like pp said PIE who publicly published magpie paper along with others, project truth in the US, tones of known peadophile organisations world wide. These are the public known about ones, the ones that campaign for age of consent to be dropped etc. Never mind those that are behind closed doors.

This is the world I grew up on though, I allways find it baffling other people aren't aware this goes on. Imo it's this blindness that is part of why it's able to continue. By it's still ts true of everything.

Just googled NAMBLA and PIE.

Well yes criminals & sickos organise in every other type of crime, murderers in gang violence or war crimes, racists in kkk, fuck knows what in mafia's, arms trade, sex trafficking, etc etc why is it so unknown about that peadophiles aren't just social you awkward wierdos in some basement somewhere. They organise & infiltrate irl & online same as any other types of criminals do.

& women are complicit in, linked to, prof it ing from peadophile organisations. Pamela freyd being the obvious known name

I'm in. Whoever said about the gender related questions trans supporters can never seem to answer. Yy to this.

I am aware of PIE in the 1970s, yes.

I think, unrelated to PIE, there was a legitimate argument about lowering the age of consent for homosexual acts to be in line with the age of consent to heterosexual acts in the 1970s. On the darker side, however, there were people then, as now, who argue that the age of consent is arbitrary, because it is different in different countries and has changed over time and hi-jacked that argument for the removal of the age of consent.

The connection would be what? That the age of consent for medical procedures is 16. Thing is parents can make decisions before that, but usually in cases of clinical need it is obvious and there are agreed medical guidelines. So, the issue is who is driving the definition of clinical need here, where drugs are being given before age 16?

The second connection is more complex and harder to argue because it is about erasing sex (literally) and creating gender as the biological marker (which is a social construct, because what it means changes over time and place). Gender does not have any age of consent attached to it, because boys and girls have a set of socially constructed ideas around them from birth. However, children can choose to say no to those stereotypes and be their own person. Why does this lead to changing their bodies?

I wouldn't even bother trying to talk to my MP because he's a textbook brocialist and possibly the most arrogant man I've ever met in my life.

The trans lobby has a vested interest in promoting non psychological treatment, and politically they have successfully worked to have it declassified as a mental health condition

I posted this link on the references thread, but it seems quite relevant here:

www.rcgp.org.uk/news/2017/january/uk-organisations-unite-against-conversion-therapy.aspx

This is where the medical professionals stand, the statement says such things as:

"Sexual orientations and gender identities are not mental health disorders, although exclusion, stigma and prejudice may precipitate mental health issues for any person subjected to these abuses. Anyone accessing therapeutic help should be able to do so without fear of judgement or the threat of being pressured to change a fundamental aspect of who they are.”

This statement seems perfectly reasonable regarding sexual orientation, but with regard to gender identity it doesn't make sense: surely one fundamental aspect of who you are is your body, and by not counselling people to come to terms with the body they have, and thereby encouraging them to have medical interventions, they are being pressured to change a fundamental aspect of who they are.

I was talking to a male friend about it all tonight. He didn't see how it could be that bad because men would never get away with walking into women's changing rooms etc...

We covered Danielle, the implications of self-declaration and the CPS schools pack. I could literally see the pennies dropping. It was very satisfying.

That's brilliant. I peak transed my mum this weekend. We had a massive row about this subject a few months back as she didn't like how angry I was getting about it but she agrees with me now.

Roquefort -

Thanks for that link. It's absolutely terrible that sexual orientation and gender identity are conflated like this. They are entirely different things!

One is about who you ARE (or who you think you are, or who you imagine you want to be) and one is about who you what to be WITH - how is this simple distinction not clear?