We’re Still Here Conference 8th September: A report from the inside

[TheHarpySings]

Hi all

First off, I’m a regular poster, have been here for years under various usernames, it I’m posting here on a name change as I don’t want this traced to me.

On 8th September there was a conference held in London a Bloomsbury Baptist Church which was called We’re Still Here, which featured a variety of panels and workshops and was attended by many prominent people in the pro-GRA reform camp.

I decided to attend to find out what was being said as it was clear that they did not want anyone to attend that wasn’t a TRA or an ally.

What follows are my notes from the day. But first a few notes on attendance:

There were probably 80-100 people in attendance. Overwhelmingly white. Mainly older transwomen. A couple of transmen. Some Mermaids delegates. Some fellow travellers/ allies. And me.

Okay. So here’s my notes

1. Health Panel: Chair was Dr Ben Vincent of GIRES.

Part of the discussion on this panel was around GPs reluctance to prescribe “bridging hormones”. GPs are reluctant/afraid to prescribe them for liability reasons. Apparently a brand of T-Gel was withdrawn and GPs are reluctant to switch brands.

There was then a bit of chatter about whether a person’s sex was relevant for healthcare stats.

Then there was discussion about trans children. Dr Vincent was very scathing about GIDS-said there was disgusting and unethical practices. BV spoke about dispelling the myths about desistance and the myths of ROGD- BV called this “concern trolling, malicious and ethically bankrupt”. BV would like a review of the whole system.

Then Dr Vincent said that they’d received a review copy of “Born in your own body” edited by Heather Brunskell-Evans and Michele Moore. BV is reviewing it for some Royal College and said “I will tear it a new arsehole”

Also (and they didn't want this tweeted) BV is also planning a book called Terf Wars which will be a “rigorous takedown of terf arguments” which is getting serialised as articled in some peer reviewed journal- I’m sorry but I couldn’t catch which one.

Dr Stuart Lorimer, of the Tavistock and Portman who was also a panellist- said that ROGD is “evidence free”.

There was a great deal of discussion as to the health risks for transwomen taking certain brands of hormones- one person said they knew three other people who’d died taking them, and they’d nearly died as well.

...and then you throw in an analysis of Stonewall's capacity and influence to make these plans happen,

theleedscitizen.wordpress.com/2018/10/19/influence-groupthink-and-fear-leeds-and-the-stifling-of-the-transgender-debate/

and we may be too late to turn the tide.

Like they give a shit about period poverty. They've demanded a whole consultation and law change in part because a one off cost of 140 quid for a GRC is deemed too expensive and exclusionary. I wonder if any of them have worked out how much women have to spend on sanpro from puberty through to menopause?

Thank you very much OP for attending and writing detailed notes. A lot to think about.

Can you imagine if they'd said that about anyone else? "Yes, say a few things in support of a group for disability rights/Jewish community/ethnic minorities so it looks like we give a shit about them."

There was a transwoman (or someone who said they were) on Reddit a couple of years back who was inviting teens whose family weren't sympathetic to her home so she could help them get hormones.. Not like that could be dodgy, eh?

There is unfortunately a good reason to be weary of any concerted effort by late-transitioning males to socialise with transkids.

Here are a few quotes from the page Advice to Parents of Transkids from a former transkid who transitioned decades ago who has since extensively researched the science of transsexualism, campaigned for trans rights and who also has a lot of experience regarding this issue:

The single most damaging thing that could happen in a therapeutic setting would be to include your transkid in a support group for older adult transitioning transsexuals. Simply put, their etiology, experiences, motivations, and especially sexuality, are at complete odds with transkids’ experiences and needs. Asking youngsters to expose their innermost feelings to others is best done with those like themselves.

Similarly, do not allow your transkid child to socialize with older transitioning transsexuals. Instead, help your child to find and maintain friendships with other transkids of similar age.

Under no circumstance allow your MTF child to share a room with an adult MTF transitioner. The hospital administration usually has no real clue about the realities of transsexuality and transsexuals, and think that we are all the same. No one would think of asking a young lady to share a hospital room with an older straight man… but that is in effect what is happening in hospitals on a regular basis.

Autogynephilic MTF transsexuals are sexually attracted to women, and often, even especially, to young MTF transkids. Further, a fair number of autogynephilic individuals sexualize the very act, the process of changing sex, both in themselves and in others. Due to a lifetime of socialization as men, and only limited experience in their new gender role, these individuals often do not recognize appropriate boundaries. Do not allow your child to be so exposed when they are at their most physically and emotionally vulnerable point in their young lives!

(I myself had a very upsetting incident when I had SRS. A few years ago, I accompanied a transkid to that very same hospital, who had a similar experience, 28 years after my own.)

P.S. This is not a gender critical person. It's someone who'd probably consider us all to be transphobes. And this wasn't written to provide arguments for our side of the debate as regards the safeguarding of children or to slag off late-transitioners but solely to protect her kind of transsexuals - homosexual transkids.

Thanks for gathering and sharing this.

Fuck...

It's almost word for word what I would have written if I had had a guess on what they wuld have said but I would love to have been wrong

And thank you TheHarpySings for the report. Altogether chilling and not something I want to believe if I am entirely honest.

That anyone could so cynically state that it's a winning strategy to pretend that they care about women and children - no it's not a new thing this, of course, but to state this publicly? That betrays a breathtaking level of arrogance, cruelty and misogyny. Because they could earnestly campaign for women's and children's issues and gain the same advantages. But they choose to pretend.

CharleyParley...

I'm the author of the 'advice' essay that you linked to... I've also commented on this section a number of times in the past and have always been treated with respect. I'm actually grateful to those here who have learned the difference between autogynephilic transfolk and transkids. To understand why, one may read my 2009 essay on "The Invisible Transsexual" and other essays at Transkids.us :

www.transkids.us/invisible.html

Thanks for your comment @Sillyolme. I have by now actually read through your entire webpage because you have made the science very accessible to those new to it and have also learnt to understand just how different the two types of transsexuals are. I will look at your other webpage as well.

I meant no disrespect by saying you'd probably think we're transphobes - it's simply something we're told regularly for our concern about safeguarding transkids and children in general as well as for saying there's a difference between early and late transitioning transsexuals. I should have realised that would not be your view. I apologise for offending you.

@charlieparley i would have sent that webpage in with my consultation if I'd have seen it before. please can someone do so

Thank you so much for unearthing this. They will stop at nothing to get to children.

The HT at my son's school has discounted all my concerns with Stonewall. Thinks I'm being a bit silly over my concerns re the likes of JB and the Challenors. AC being on Stonewall's advisory panel.

OP: thank you for attending and reporting. You deserve a medal.

I did not realise the full magnitude of what is going on. I fear I still don't.

"Yes, say a few things in support of a group for disability rights/Jewish community/ethnic minorities so it looks like we give a shit about them."

It’s tactical use of another classic pattern that abusers use.

Reaction formation: when someone who has a desire that induces anxiety or which is perceived as unacceptable, they disguise it by embracing something that publically demonstrates the opposite tendency.

Mermaids are apparently interested in researching the crossover with trans/ autism and also sexual orientation.

This terrifies me more than anything else. And much of it does. There are doctors, clinical psychologists and psychiatrists, researchers, specialists in autism who have spent decades exploring gender and autism. Building up vast swathes of knowledge and these dear god, Barnum and Bailey do-gooders come along and claim they are the best people to explore that issue? Just to grab some money and prove the need for their own existence, not because they either understand or care about autism to any depth. No. Just no.

It worries me too, I have a child with an ASD diagnosis and I really don't want Mermaids involving themselves in any research or with existing support organisations for individuals with autism.

Thank you Harpy. What struck me was how they can talk about three poeple dying from hormone treatment and then casually go on to talk about how to get more children to transition.

Lobby groups and research. Bad mix.

See Ben Goldacre and Margaret McCartney.

Suspicious as hell.

If they had credibility they'd recognise this.

parentingsciencegang.org.uk/web-chats/how-different-are-womens-and-mens-brains/

I'm going to post this here as this woman appears to have done some research already and guess what folks, affects of stereotyping features heavily.

fucking hell

Thank you for doing this. Absolutely bloody terrifying

The HT at my son's school has discounted all my concerns with Stonewall. Thinks I'm being a bit silly over my concerns re the likes of JB and the Challenors. AC being on Stonewall's advisory panel.
Just thinking out loud: if you've gone to him/her with these concerns and been dismissed, could you/we then start compiling lists of headteachers, governors, MPs, councillors, etc who have dismissed our concerns? Then put them all on one website and hold them publicly accountable for safeguarding failures? If we had one well publicised site for this kind of thing we'd find out about more safeguarding failures because teachers and social workers could contact the site and explain what has happened, names redacted. And mention the names of the people who were warned and who had issued the concerns out of hand.
I think the ability to hide in plain sight is their biggest asset, and the website would be an ideal way to shine some light on this.
It's just a thought.

And a massive thank you to OP of course.

When and how are they going to start trying to discredit this?

I think that's an excellent idea Turph