Meet the Other Phone. Flexible and made to last.

Meet the Other Phone.
Flexible and made to last.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

The lawyers have arrived!

71 replies

FannyCann · 01/11/2019 08:22

The lawyers have arrived at last. Hopefully the brakes will go on.

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1Tdu2PbARVs9uvCPXFubss63jV2Ka4N/view

OP posts:
realitycalling · 01/11/2019 08:29

Finally! It is a shameful comment on the extent of regulatory capture in the medical and legal profession that there has been no exposure of the abuse of consent guidance in relation to harmful puberty blockers and extreme body modification surgery such as double mastectomies for children below the age of consent.
Really interesting reading - thank you FannyCann.

OhHolyJesus · 01/11/2019 08:32

Excellent news! That has cheered me up.

Hopefully we can go back to 'watchful waiting' which is what used to be the approach and was entirely sensible in my view.

2Rebecca · 01/11/2019 08:50

Agree. It does concern me that so often it is the mothers pushing the transgender ideology. Do they just believe the invented statistics that say transitioning reduces suicide or is it more sinister? How can people not realise years of suppressing body and brain development will have disadvantages and that young children dont realise you can't actually change sex?

HandsOffMyRights · 01/11/2019 08:55

Excellent news - thank you.
The word 'experimental' prevails.

Time to stop experimenting on children.

RedToothBrush · 01/11/2019 09:47

It does concern me that so often it is the mothers pushing the transgender ideology. Do they just believe the invented statistics that say transitioning reduces suicide or is it more sinister? How can people not realise years of suppressing body and brain development will have disadvantages and that young children dont realise you can't actually change sex?

What makes you think they don't understand?

When you dedicate your life to the activism, you repeat mantras and affirmations all day long. Why do this?

'Trans women are women' is an example of a thought terminating cliche. The purpose of thought terminating clichés is to shut down discussion and critical thought.

So you have a bunch of activists deliberately employing this as a strategy.

Why did the act of repeating positive affirmation start?

Positive affirmations were developed in the 1970’s by neuroscientists, incorporating a modern understanding of psychotherapy and linguistics in order to consciously rewire thought patterns towards more desired outcomes. Affirmations can be stated anytime and tend to be complete sentences addressing something we wish to have or be as if we already have it in the present moment.

So getting people to repeat thought terminating clichés is potentially a harmful thing in the wrong hands because it not only can be used positively but also against people to quite literally brain wash people by rewiring how their brain operates. When people adopt them though there is an awareness of there being an alternative which people wish to deliberately erase.

This could be for positive reasons to improve self worth but equally to escape some reality which they do not wish to face up to.

I found watching the bbc's documentary 'who are you calling fat?' this week really interesting. They had a number of fat activists on it, and there was one in particular who used all the same language techniques and euphemisms that are present in the trans activism arsenal. Watching the program you can predict when they will 'get offended' and walk out of a conversation. The science denail is very much present and its evangelical in its ambition to 'convert' others. It's part of an active strategy to shield the self from something in society. It's also interesting that it's about body image too. It's worth a watch purely to see how this type of thinking isnt restricted to the trans debate, and by the woman's admission is a political ideology. Ideology trumps scientific evidence because the science tells inconvenient truths.

I do find it compelling that this wave of political force comes at a time when religion is on the wane in our society.

It is almost as if we have a human need to avoid certain things.

Indeed I saw last week a study reported on the news that the human brain shields us from the idea of dying. It deliberately doesn't accept the idea of ourselves dying in any situation as the default. We can understand the concept of others dying in the same situation but we frame it to ourselves as 'something that happens to other people'. It's thought to protect us psychologically so we don't go mad trying to avoid doing anything at all but it's easy to see how it could have a perverse side effect too in that it prevents us from empathy in certain situations too.

In short the brain, psychology of religious need, self preservation and inability to empathise with others are all interconnected and we live in an age where we are just beginning to understand this, and as such this can be used against us because we fail to recognise it and have a desire to simply believe something because it might protect us from the reality of our social experience.

Bit deep and long for 9.45 on a Friday morning but I think it's worth joining up dots a little here and pointing out this isn't a trans thing but a wider issue in our current society which poses a threat to our well being.

FetchezLaVache · 01/11/2019 09:49

Great post, @RedToothBrush.

ChattyLion · 01/11/2019 09:50

Placemarking to come back and read this properly. Thanks Fanny

titchy · 01/11/2019 09:50

Really interesting red.

realitycalling · 01/11/2019 09:51

Another excellent post RedToothBrush
Thank you for repeatedly joining up the dots. Flowers

Ereshkigal · 01/11/2019 09:52

I might give that programme a watch on your recommendation Red.

RedToothBrush · 01/11/2019 10:05

Ereshkigal I found the program highlighted two things for me which were nothing to do with being fat.

It highlighted how the media has almost legitimatised the politics of denial and how society does not know how to deal with certain issues to do with self image.

It also highlights the overly simplistic approach of an authoritarian health service which takes an aggressive approach through the idea of 'correct behaviour' and neglects to think of the psychological side of health which can be deep rooted in very personal experience.

It's an example of conveyer belt medicine with a one size fits all mentality which lacks real understanding of the nature of how some health problems are incredibly complex and should be considered as such in terms of treatment.

This is where lobby groups with singular agendas and narrow focus are a real problem.

I'm sure the program is interesting from the perspective of being fat alone, but that's not why I think it's interesting and important. The implications are much more wide ranging.

Ereshkigal · 01/11/2019 10:07

It does sound interesting.

Gasp0deTheW0nderD0g · 01/11/2019 10:31

That is very interesting, red, and so is the OP.

When I was growing up in the 60s and 70s there was still a lot of authoritarianism about - don't question what you're told, he's an expert, you're just an ordinary person. Of course lots of people in the 60s started objecting to that, and a good thing too, but as so often the pendulum has swung far too much the other way.

Look at the BBC's abject failure to grasp that balance doesn't mean asking a Nobel Prizewinner and a crank to state their opposing opinions on climate change or immunisations or homeopathy, and leave the listener/viewer with the impression that both are equally valid, so they might as well pick the one they prefer.

We used to have higher standards of journalism. Nowadays the mainstream media is so pressed for money that they seem to fill their pages with barely edited press releases and soundbites. Not many trained and experienced journalists now with good critical thinking abilities and the personal integrity to challenge something even when it's going to make them unpopular.

If only we could clone Janice Turner.

CharlieParley · 01/11/2019 10:39

Thank you FannyCann that is an interesting read. Particularly good for having a few more international names to look out for on this.

Smallblanket · 01/11/2019 11:02

That article, although heartening in itself, is light years away from even crossing the consciousness of the affirmative gender treatment culture in the UK.

I'm with you Gasp on cloning Janice Turner!

FannyCann · 01/11/2019 11:36

Sorry for plopping and running, I read it as I was finishing my tea before going into work.
The Australian is usually behind a paywall I think so it was really good to see this article in full.

Great post RedToothBrush
I'll take a look at that program it sounds very interesting. I do think science denial and refusal to face uncomfortable truths is a real problem in many areas of life today.

OP posts:
Goosefoot · 01/11/2019 12:22

It does concern me that so often it is the mothers pushing the transgender ideology.

It's pretty well documented in research that women, and particularly younger women, are generally on the forefront of picking up new language trends. They seem to be language oriented in a way boys overall are not, and it's an important part of teen girl social hierarchies which are also more complex than those of teen boys.

I think it's also the case that in doing so, they often pick up the ideology behind the trends. I've seen this with gender ideology in the university educated women I know, they adopt the language and the concepts very quickly as they develop. Men, even those who go along with it, rarely seem to have the language so strongly, not do they seem so inclined to judge your wokeness based on language. (There are exceptions of course, some men are very militant, but overall women seem by far the most commonly to have embraced this here.)

FilthyBiscuit · 01/11/2019 12:47

Placemarking to read later.

FannyCann · 02/11/2019 10:09

When I first heard about puberty blockers and the medicalisation of healthy young bodies I felt sure the NHS with its regulations, adherence to evidence based practice and so on and the medical profession generally would soon put a stop to this and protect young people. But that hasn't happened to any extent and can best be summed up by @NotBadConsidering in the screenshots below.

So I then decided it would fall to lawyers and court cases to bring an end to the madness. This is a great article and it looks like lawyers in more than one country are looking at what is going on and gathering evidence. They reference Susan Evan's case which will be a very important case and reminds me that I should do a bit more digging in that direction as it needs lots of spades.

The lawyers have arrived!
The lawyers have arrived!
The lawyers have arrived!
OP posts:
Sexnotgender · 02/11/2019 10:11

Bloody excellent!

This is an enormous scandal and it needs stopping.

FrackOff · 02/11/2019 10:20

@realitycalling surgery isn't available to children under the age of consent (which age of consent? Gillick? Sex?) Have a look at gids.nhs.uk/ for what is available.

RedToothBrush · 02/11/2019 10:27

Being gillick competent is one thing. Making an informed decision is another.

Too many kids who might pass the threshold for being gillick competent are unable to make an informed decision because of misinformation, lobbying, affirmation only approaches, media bias, peer pressure, parental pressure.

To remind you, informed consent is only valid if it without undue pressure.

We do not have a climate where this is realistic in the majority of cases.

NotBadConsidering · 02/11/2019 10:29

No child can have any concept of relinquishing the possibility of future orgasms.

SonicVersusGynaephobia · 02/11/2019 10:30

But puberty blockers are not a harmless pause, or a reversible step. They effectively guarantee the child will progress to cross-sex hormones and surgery. And they are given to children starting at 11 years old.

FannyCann · 02/11/2019 10:33

FrackOff. I don't believe surgery is being done under 18 in the UK thanks to NHS regulations, but it certainly is elsewhere around the world.

Here is a group of Drs in the USA cheerfully discussing bilateral mastectomies for 12 year olds.

twitter.com/mlaidlawmd/status/1185583177026306048?s=12

The trouble is what is going on the the USA often leads the world although hopefully the pushback from, especially here in the UK, will lead to other parts of the world and eventually the USA and Canada waking up to the harm.

The other thing is, even without medical treatment, not many people are looking at the harm of social affirmation. I was thinking about the James Younger case - since age 3 his mother has been telling him he is a girl. When these cases go to court due to the other parent taking a more sceptical or at least more cautious view, often the court directions are wide ranging and very authoritarian. They will direct that no one may misgender the child, schools and all their social circle must be gender affirmative etc. So the child is totally gaslit by every adult they come in contact with. It will be very hard for them to wake up and announce they are indeed a boy and want to be treated as a boy. The mental harm will be long lasting.

OP posts:
Please create an account

To comment on this thread you need to create a Mumsnet account.

This thread is closed and is no longer accepting replies. Click here to start a new thread.