Meet the Other Phone. Child-safe in minutes.

Meet the Other Phone.
Child-safe in minutes.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

Yogyakarta principles

88 replies

Trousersdontmakemeaman · 21/04/2018 13:54

yogyakartaprinciples.org/

At the Bristol meeting Shelia Jeffreys refers to these principles which are behind the worldwide drive to include cross dressing males in the legal definition of female. I haven't read them all yet, it is long, but I thought it may be of interest.

OP posts:
frankexchangeofviews · 25/04/2018 21:01

The 2006 version describes homosexuality as being same gender attracted. It’s not a mistake either; the principles clearly differentiate between sex and gender. I don’t think the later version changed l.

OldCrone · 25/04/2018 22:34

The 2006 version describes homosexuality as being same gender attracted.
Stephen Whittle was involved in writing the Yogyakarta Principles. Stephen wants to replace the category 'sex' with 'gender' as in this paper.
www.socresonline.org.uk/12/1/whittle.html

OldCrone · 25/04/2018 22:42

ItsAllGoingToBeFine
But thats the weird thing - people are seeing and presenting the Yogykarta doo dah as part of "human rights" I'm not sure where that has come from?

The document is described as:
Principles on the application of international human rights law in relation to sexual orientation and gender identity
It was put together by a group of lawyers and other people working in the area of human rights. They are a bunch of experts, the rest of us supposedly know nothing about anything, so we all should defer to their greater expertise. I think this is where all the governments are coming from which are just swallowing it whole without engaging brains first.

Trousersdontmakemeaman · 26/04/2018 16:26

Many of the experts were intersex. It has been thoroughly hijacked.

One of the principles focuses on not discriminating on others. I will dig it out, because whilst that is in the Yog principles it has been totally ignored in the rush to be inclusive, as we all know.

I think this needs to be highlighted to anyone using these principles to further policies etc.

OP posts:
Trousersdontmakemeaman · 26/04/2018 16:39

In the preamble:

^NOTING that international human rights law imposes an absolute prohibition of discrimination in regard to the full enjoyment of all human rights, civil, cultural, economic, political and social, that respect for sexual rights, sexual orientation and gender identity is
integral to the realisation of equality between men and women and that States must take measures to seek to eliminate prejudices and customs based on the idea of the inferiority or the superiority of one sex or on stereotyped roles for men and women, and noting further
that the international community has recognised the right of persons to decide freely and responsibly on matters related to their sexuality, including sexual and reproductive health, free from coercion, discrimination, and violence;^

So, I don't believe men are able to impose their rights on women as a sex class in the way Stonewall are advocating. It says so above.

OP posts:
OldCrone · 26/04/2018 16:56

Many of the experts were intersex.

How do you know this? The only ones I had heard of were Stephen Whittle (transman) and Mary Robinson (ex-president of Ireland). I don't know how you'd find out which experts were intersex.

On the Wikipedia page it actually mentions a criticism of the principles: "The Principles do not deal appropriately or adequately with the application of international human rights law in relation to intersex people."

Trousersdontmakemeaman · 26/04/2018 17:03

It's on the Wiki page with bios.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yogyakarta_Principles

OP posts:
Trousersdontmakemeaman · 26/04/2018 17:04

Hover over the names and you get bios

OP posts:
Wanderabout · 26/04/2018 17:15

What are 'sexual rights'?

Trousersdontmakemeaman · 26/04/2018 17:21

As it is now emerging it is the right for Autogynephiles to bring their fetish to work.

OP posts:
OldCrone · 26/04/2018 17:33

Trousers
I'm a bit confused about what you are getting at regarding the intersex issue. Are you saying that intersex people have hijacked something intended for another group of people, or that it was supposed to be for intersex people and has been hijacked by others?

From the Wikipedia page, there is only one intersex participant in the original Yogyakarta, and that individual plus two others in the +10.

Trousersdontmakemeaman · 26/04/2018 17:46

The panel is not made up of trans people. It's largely human rights lawyers , however many people are not referenced and this could be for another reason, i.e. identities have subsequently changed. So I was saying it was about, seemingly, in the main, intersex rights, not trans rights.

OP posts:
OldCrone · 26/04/2018 20:52

I've got a different impression about what the Yogyakarta Principles were about. I don't think they were ever supposed to be mainly about intersex but about sexual orientation and stopping the persecution of gay, lesbian and bisexual people around the world. Somehow, T got tagged on to LGB and they invited Stephen Whittle to participate. There may be some other trans advocates in there, but I do not recognise any names.

Stephen Whittle's aim is to do away with the category of 'sex' altogether and replace it with 'gender', as in this article from 2007. www.socresonline.org.uk/12/1/whittle.html

There is no indication from the list of participants that 'intersex' was really on the agenda'. It is only mentioned once in the whole document. The criticism I mentioned above regarding the lack of input about intersex people was (possibly) addressed in the YP +10 with the inclusion of at least 2 additional participants whose main area of interest is intersex people.

I am fairly sure that the aim was to help the LGB community, with perfectly reasonable measures. It was hijacked by T in the shape of Stephen Whittle (and possibly others) who added some totally unreasonable stuff about self-id for trans people, which is now being held up as 'international best practice' and applied without any analysis by various governments.

BeyondParody · 26/04/2018 21:35

Marking my place to read in the morning 👍

GardenGeek · 26/04/2018 21:41

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

Trousersdontmakemeaman · 27/04/2018 18:35

OldCrone, that seems a reasonable summation.

The Whittle paper is the one I've been posting here for several weeks now, I found it back when Whittle was posting here, and I did ask about it. The response was that they would have done anything to survive. So all this bullshit and lies is from a place of their own neurotic fear, we are all caught up in their psychodrama.

OP posts:
TerfinUSA · 27/04/2018 19:52

"Undertake programmes of education and awareness to promote and enhance the full enjoyment of all human rights by all persons, irrespective of sexual orientation or gender identity;
Integrate within State policy and decision-making a pluralistic approach that recognises and affirms the interrelatedness and indivisibility of all aspects of human identity including sexual orientation and gender identity" - gender identity is real (but somehow biological sex isn't) and the state must promote the concept, but the actual discrimination specifically and solely due to biological sex - sorry we don't give a shiny shit about that.

"Discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation or gender identity includes any distinction, exclusion, restriction or preference based on sexual orientation or gender identity which has the purpose or effect of nullifying or impairing equality before the law or the equal protection of the law, or the recognition, enjoyment or exercise, on an equal basis, of all human rights and fundamental freedoms" - You can never exclude people on the basis of their gender identity. Never! Respect my authority!

"Take appropriate measures to secure adequate advancement of persons of diverse sexual orientations and gender identities as may be necessary to ensure such groups or individuals equal enjoyment or exercise of human rights. Such measures shall not be deemed to be discriminatory;" - You must ensure that there is specific representation for people of 'diverse gender identity'. No word of what the fuck this actually means. Stefonknee?

"No one shall be forced to undergo medical procedures, including sex reassignment surgery, sterilisation or hormonal therapy, as a requirement for legal recognition of their gender identity. " - in other words 'gender identity' is completely arbitrary on an individual's say-so, and you must not assert that it is linked to any hormone state, possession of male genitals, etc.

"Take all necessary legislative, administrative and other measures to ensure that procedures exist whereby all State-issued identity papers which indicate a person’s gender/sex — including birth certificates, passports, electoral records and other documents — reflect the person’s profound self-defined gender identity;" - my gender is whatever I say it is, and nobody can deny that, this obviously includes Ian Huntley, mass-murderers, rapists, people breaking into girl's bedrooms to masturbate etc.

"Ensure that changes to identity documents will be recognised in all contexts where the identification or disaggregation of persons by gender is required by law or policy;" - having said that you can print whatever gender on your documents you like, this must be recognised in all contexts. So rapists MUST be allowed in female prisons.

" The right to privacy ordinarily includes the choice to disclose or not to disclose information relating to one’s sexual orientation or gender identity, as well as decisions and choices regarding both one’s own body and consensual sexual and other relations with others.

Ensure the right of all persons ordinarily to choose when, to whom and how to disclose information pertaining to their sexual orientation or gender identity, and protect all persons from arbitrary or unwanted disclosure, or threat of disclosure of such information by others." The fact that that 'woman' has a penis is protected information. Shut up.

"Provide adequate access to medical care and counselling appropriate to the needs of those in custody, recognising any particular needs of persons on the basis of their sexual orientation or gender identity, including with regard to reproductive health, access to HIV/AIDS information and therapy and access to hormonal or other therapy as well as to gender-reassignment treatments where desired;"

This creates an open-ended right to 'gender-reassignment treatment', which may include procedures denied to natal women, such as hair removal.

"Ensure, to the extent possible, that all prisoners participate in decisions regarding the place of detention appropriate to their sexual orientation and gender identity;" Prisoners can choose if they want to go to male or female prison. Yay!

"Take all necessary legislative, administrative and other measures to ensure that no child’s body is irreversibly altered by medical procedures in an attempt to impose a gender identity without the full, free and informed consent of the child in accordance with the
age and maturity of the child and guided by the principle that in all actions concerning children, the best interests of the child shall be a primary consideration;" I suspect they have a different definition of free and informed consent....

StarkStaring · 27/04/2018 19:56

So if you are a heterosexual man you can ask to be put in a women's prison?

Trousersdontmakemeaman · 27/04/2018 19:57

Yes, I agree TerfinUSA

OP posts:
TerfinUSA · 27/04/2018 19:59

Obviously the +10 principles are like TRA level 2.0, and include stuff like

". Ensure that all individuals can participate in sport without discrimination on the grounds of sexual orientation, gender identity, gender expression or sex characteristics; " which translates as 'transwomen can compete in women's sport'

"Adopt and implement policies to combat violence, discrimination and other harm on grounds of sexual orientation, gender identity, gender expression or sex characteristics faced by persons who are deprived of their liberty, including with respect to such issues as placement, body or other searches, items to express gender,
access to and continuation of gender affirming treatment and medical care, and “protective” solitary confinement;"

'Items to express gender' LOL.

". Ensure that all individuals who wish to participate in sport are supported to do so irrespective of sexual orientation, gender identity, gender expression and sex characteristics, and that all individuals are able to participate, without restriction, subject only to reasonable, proportionate and non-arbitrary requirements to participate in line with their self-declared gender;"

And yes it tells government to 'address' any sort of gender-critical behaviour as the putative root of violence against people with different gender idintity.

TerfinUSA · 27/04/2018 20:04

"So if you are a heterosexual man you can ask to be put in a women's prison?"

Ahem.

Try again with your language. The approved term is 'lesbian transwoman'.

But yes. Absolutely. If you assert that your gender identity is female, then anyone who denies it for any reason whatsoever, including but not limited to the fact that you have done absolutely nothing whatsoever to change your behaviour or appearance from when you asserted you were a man, then that person an evil human rights abuser and will surely burn in hell for their denial of your human rights.

Or perhaps just have the government investigate them for their
"advocacy of hatred that constitutes incitement to discrimination, hostility, or violence on grounds of sexual orientation, gender identity, gender expression or sex characteristics, whether by public or private actors;"

Lock everyone up who says that Ian Huntley is not a woman. Put them all in prison. They are evil and must be silenced.

Trousersdontmakemeaman · 27/04/2018 20:05

I spent half of last year wondering why Trump got elected. Now I know.

OP posts:
TerfinUSA · 27/04/2018 20:31

They will broker no definition of 'female gender identity', so claiming that someone who looks, appears and acts according to typical male patterns, and has male male biology is not going to change that.

So it literally comes down to 'I'm a woman because I say so, now shut up or you will go to prison for denying my self-defined gender identity''

Self-defined gender identity means whatever YOU want. So there is nothing that can ever possibly circumscribe it. I assert I am female therefore I am female and the Degenderettes will be round to sort you out if you disagree.

Note that fundamentally they do not give a damn about the women and girls raped, murdered, excluded from school, genitally mutilated, left to die in childbirth, etc. There is not one word about sex in the original principles. Not one word. Someone said 'hey guyz we should try and pretend we're not actually just MRAs and add something in when we top-up on our TRA nonsense for version 2.0', so they did add 'sex characteristics' in in the +10.

But it was always an afterthought, and it's still subordinate to MRA 'gender identity'. There's NOTHING allowed to circumscribe gender identity. Not 'sex characteristics'. In fact half the uses of 'sex characteristics' in the +10 version is to say 'how dare you try to assert the sex characteristics of transpeople you transphobic scum'.

Check out principle 10:

"Prohibit any practice, and repeal any laws and policies, allowing intrusive and irreversible treatments on the basis of sexual orientation, gender identity, gender expression or sex characteristics, including forced genital-normalising surgery, involuntary sterilisation, unethical experimentation, medical display, “reparative” or “conversion” therapies, when enforced or administered without the free, prior, and informed consent of the person concerned."

These utter bastards managed to write a whole fucking principle on protecting people's genitals and they make it about a trans/intersex rights? I mean the actual fuck do these MRAs realise that hundreds of millions of women are subject to actual genital mutilation, but yet they manage to refer.

And NO there's not an anti-FGM clause somewhere else. That's it. It's about protecting the right of 'transwomen' to have male genitals and if you don't like it you can suck their dicks.

And nooooooo, of course there's not one solitary word about menstruation in there. This is about MEN'S rights. MEN'S 'sexual characteristics'. Bollocks.

But, oh wait they did stick up for women's rights. The right to be trafficked and sold as prostitutes, of course that's really important isn't it. Menstruation and FGM nobody has got TIME for that shit. But sex work is another matter, we gotta protect the right to get your end away:

"Repeal other forms of criminalisation and sanction impacting on rights and freedoms on the basis of sexual orientation, gender identity, gender expression or sex characteristics, including the criminalisation of sex work"

puckingfixies · 28/04/2018 21:31

Fucking hell. I risked my life to have my daughter and THIS is the world I've brought her in to.

To add insult to injury, we're in Ireland and that Sinn Fein bill terrifies me. How long before someone claims paedophilia is a sexual orientation and paedophiles shouldn't be discriminated against or referred for treatment/therapy?

Trousersdontmakemeaman · 02/05/2018 21:06

Can we actually talk about how much this is being misused by politicians and lobbyists please?

OP posts: