Orwell Prize Winner Janice Turner’s latest article deserves its own thread

[NotBadConsidering]

www.thetimes.co.uk/article/59a66a62-c2e8-11ea-ac82-8308736f5ec7?shareToken=ec44efc7f098f76d0a75ed74f472a978

The section about what happened in 2017 is shocking. But the whole article is Janice at her brilliant best.

I would also add that I read the Billy Bragg article in The Guardian, and not only was it a load of rubbish, but the comments were overwhelmingly in support of what Janice is saying here, showing the Guardian is way out of touch with its readership.

[aliasundercover]

do you think the term ‘cis woman’ should be banned?

I'm quite content for anyone to refer to me as 'cis', as long as they will respectfully listen as I explain to them precisely why I reject that term, and not complain when I refer to a 'transwoman' as a 'TIM".

[AgileLass]

The number of academics posting Janice Turner’s article and sneering variations on “SHE SAYS SHE’S BEING SILENCED WITH HER COLUMN IN A NATIONAL NEWSPAPER, HA HA” is deeply embarrassing. Clearly they haven’t read it, and are rushing to post based on the headline. I really do worry for my profession.

[larrygrylls]

Alias,

Personally I am very pro free speech.

I am even against holocaust denial being illegal (and I am Jewish). I think only a tiny minority truly believe in it these days, though.

The ability to remain friends with someone with genuinely different views is something that is sadly dying out (look at Brexit or BLM threads).

[EmbarrassingAdmissions]

The ability to remain friends with someone with genuinely different views is something that is sadly dying out (look at Brexit or BLM threads).

I always think of Daryl Davis (black musician who has befriended many Ku Klux Klan members): How One Man Convinced 200 Ku Klux Klan Members To Give Up Their Robes

www.npr.org/2017/08/20/544861933/how-one-man-convinced-200-ku-klux-klan-members-to-give-up-their-robes?

[AnyOldPrion]

Congratulations Janice. A well deserved honour and a great piece.

The comments on the Billy Bragg article are heartening! I didn’t get all the way down, but most disagreed with him.

[RedToothBrush]

[quote EmbarrassingAdmissions]We strangely have a situation at present where the law is being misapplied to the general population through institutions over stepping the limits of the law, but the most elite in government are actually above the law

David Miliband described this as a 'age of impunity' - and it is.

The 21st century is being defined by diminished outrage and accountability. Miliband called the lack of constraint on this “arrogance of power” a “political emergency”, “a new and chilling normal.” Civilians are expendable…Miliband drew five lessons. First, beware this vacuum in global leadership. Second, the western retreat from robust foreign policy reflects a crisis in domestic western politics…Third, the fight for civil and political rights is never over…

www.thelancet.com/action/showPdf?pii=S0140-6736%2819%2931667-8[/quote]
The old Ed versus David Question...

[wellbehavedwomen]

@Bluepolkadots42

I like to think I believe strongly in free speech.
I have been lurking on numerous threads about trans-rights and the trans community- there were lots when JK Rowling published that blog- and I was keen to read threads covering both sides of the debate to ensure any conclusions I drew were informed.

One thing that did spring to my mind- particularly when reading comments from posters who expressed real concern about rises in the number of children identifying as trans- was whether people say 40 or 50 years ago were making similar comments except about gay people? I suspect 50 years ago it was very rare for children to openly say they identified as gay because of the social context at the time, (but that doesn't mean they didn't exist) however there would surely have been more gay people in their late teens/early 20s being open about their sexuality leading to some form of concern for some members of society. I don't really know where I'm going next with this rambling thought- but interested in others' views.

There's a really interesting piece (written by a gay woman) on why the comparison doesn't really hold.

It's also worth noting that I've never, ever seen women on here, or anywhere else, say pieces such as this should never be written and that there should be a campaign to silence those holding these views. That's always aimed at women, when pointing out that male people have a bit of a track record in telling us what we are allowed to think, do, and be.

[nauticant]

We strangely have a situation at present where the law is being misapplied to the general population through institutions over stepping the limits of the law, but the most elite in government are actually above the law when it comes to their behaviour and are not held to account because the culture mob are too busy hunting witches for their heretic beliefs rather than focusing on real abuses of power.

Whenever I see stuff like this it always brings to mind what happened during the Miners' Strike.

[SophocIestheFox]

That Billy Bragg article was embarrassingly facile.

I’ve moved a little on free speech in the last couple of years, and am now much more strongly in favour than I was before, when I wavered a bit on the “right to offend”. I think I was in a bit of a bubble in that I didn’t really want to say anything much that I wouldn’t be “allowed” to. It was my atheism that woke me up to the imperative need to speak critically about belief systems without fear of offending the people that adhere to those belief systems. Then when I came to be gender critical, and was not able to express my thoughts on feminism as I wished to, for fear of retribution, it all became a lot clearer.

I was also conflicted on Starkey, who is really a nasty character. It can be so pleasing to see someone like that get their comeuppance, but I have to oppose his cancellation because otherwise I’d be a steaming hypocrite. He should not lose his work because of his opinions, unpleasant though they may be (he should lose his work because he’s not that great of a historian, I suspect he’s pretty awful to work with and you couldn’t pay me to watch or read his work - but that is another matter entirely).

I have never reported a user here for using the words cis or TERF and nor would I. I can understand the urge to game the system and redress the balance of censorship but I don’t think it helps. Let’s have it all out there and spend less time getting outraged about what people say and more time getting outraged over what they do.

[wellbehavedwomen]

@OvaHere

One thing that did spring to my mind- particularly when reading comments from posters who expressed real concern about rises in the number of children identifying as trans- was whether people say 40 or 50 years ago were making similar comments except about gay people? I suspect 50 years ago it was very rare for children to openly say they identified as gay because of the social context at the time, (but that doesn't mean they didn't exist) however there would surely have been more gay people in their late teens/early 20s being open about their sexuality leading to some form of concern for some members of society. I don't really know where I'm going next with this rambling thought- but interested in others' views.

I've considered this as have many others here. The questions for me are why there is such a divide in demographics - 4000% rise in female children/teens? What causes this disparity?

Ditto middle aged transitioners are overwhelmingly male - if a certain percentage of people are randomly 'born in the wrong body' shouldn't we see a more even spread across age and sex demographics?

My mum immediately said this about the rise in transitions. That you have huge numbers of girls (half autistic, and many with very troubled pasts) seemingly determined to opt out of having a sexed female body, and then you have a large cohort of middle aged heterosexual males, many very aggressively demanding full and equal access to spaces where women are, in law and in practice, fully entitled to exclude men.

Those are very, very different groups of people. And she made the point that transsexuals, in the old school sense, tended to be gay males who had been adamant, as soon as they were old enough to speak at all, that they were girls. Which is a different group, again.

The thing is, I don't think most of us with concerns started with concerns. I for one was always a staunch supporter of trans people achieving full social and political equality. It's the concept that you erase sex - and with it, women's own efforts towards social and political equality, and indeed basic safety from male predation - that alarmed me. And parallel, I'm alarmed by very young girls taking hormones that could harm them badly, and having surgeries that can't be reversed, when we have no real evidence of any merit on the long term efficacy of that, or whether they may come to bitterly regret it. I'm also alarmed that so little concern seems to be informing medical care, related to the co-morbid problems the group may have. SOME cases will, I absolutely believe, be of genuine dysphoria. But how many will have other root causes, that could be addressed, instead, that drive the dysphoria? So are you just treating a symptom of a greater distress, or the actual cause?

It wouldn't matter, really, if transition were purely social. Who cares, in that case (with due respect paid to peers, in terms of sex as well as gender). It does matter if healthy young people are entering into a hugely medicalised pathway that has no clear way out.

Being gay has no impact at all on anyone else. Nor does it impact the healthy bodies of the kids in question, let alone involve medicalised interventions with serious risks. If there's nothing wrong with gender dysphoric kids, why are we consideringly medical interventions? And why is nobody really demanding that we look at why so many kids with mental health problems - which this cohort clearly do have, unrelated to the dysphoria, because mental health problems in autistic kids are the norm and not the exception - want to transition, and what drives that desire? Why is it bigoted for parents and others to express concerns? We're talking drug treatments for life, carrying proven and serious risks, and the most serious and invasive forms of surgery imaginable, should transition hold. 89% plus will outgrow dysphoria without hormone blockers, yet 100% transition with them. That's a massive issue, and it's not transphobic to sound the alarm.

[Bluepolkadots42]

@BernardBlackMissesLangCleg

Bluepolkadots42

wishing to conform with the stereotypes of appearance and behaviour typically associated with the opposite sex =/= being gay

does that answer your question?

No it doesn't- sorry my toddler had me up every 2 hours last night and my brain is barely functioning. I barely passed GCSE Maths so you're going to need to explain in a less equation style way please.

[nauticant]

Men wanting to dress up so they appear feminine is nothing at all like men being exclusively physically attracted to other men. (You can do the same sentence to apply to women.)

[Bluepolkadots42]

@wellbehavedwomen thank you for the link- I will have a read of it in a bit.

Yes I can definitely see why there is concern around medicalised transition paths- however my understanding was that people have to live for at least 2 years just 'socially' as their preferred gender? I guess though if you have an 11 year old they are still very young by the time they've done the 2 required years.
It's a very interesting point your mum makes about autistic girls making up a large proportion of trans teens- will have to look at some of that research. I work with young people- specifically in an all girls setting- and of the trans students we have a number have also been autistic.

I completely agree that being gay has no impact on anyone else- however in yester years the gay community was demonised and homosexuality was viewed by media and mainstream society as 'deviant' and 'dangerous' a very real threat to a moral and decent society. I wasn't alive in these times thankfully- but I don't think it's so hard to imagine that people at that time could have expressed dismay when society became more accepting of gay people, perhaps expressing horror or alarm that gay people would be sharing their changing spaces/toilets etc (which is ridiculous because as with trans people now, gay people had always existed just not necessarily as visibly) in the same way I have seen on some threads online people saying that allowing trans women into cis women's spaces is a threat to cis women's safety. Personally I don't view a trans woman in my changing space as any more a threat to me than a straight woman or a gay woman because I don't believe in that context someone's gender is what is the threat, but their personality is (e.g. murderous psycho could be of any gender). But I appreciate we all have a right to feel differently on these matters.
Thinking again historically about a time when people have been morally outraged at the thought of sharing spaces with a minority we can look at the moral panic and outrage in parts of the US when de-segregation measures began. Those white people genuinely felt black children in the same school as their own children was a threat, unacceptable, immoral even.
I've just been talking to a friend about this who is studying a PhD and specialises in feminism and women's issues (hate that term really- women's issues should be everyone's issues but anyway I digress) and we've vaguely followed the train of thought I've outlined above and come to the depressing conclusion that in many ways society hasn't progressed that much at all. Women still don't have equality in a number of areas, black lives matters still needs to exist as a movement, minorities like trans people and gay people are still facing discrimination and abuse etc.
Anyway I'm coming very off topic now- thanks for bearing with me if you've read this far!

[Bluepolkadots42]

@nauticant

Men wanting to dress up so they appear feminine is nothing at all like men being exclusively physically attracted to other men. (You can do the same sentence to apply to women.)

Thanks for making it more tired brain friendly!
So- I agree those 2 things are different, however the point of comparison for me is that at one point gay people weren't socially accepted and so it's on that basis that I was drawing a comparison between how some people are responding to the trans community and trans rights etc. in 2020 and how potentially ( can't be sure as wasn't there and haven't done tons of social history research) at a point in time people were making similar comments and behaving similarly towards gay people and the gay community.

[Bluepolkadots42]

@nauticant

Men wanting to dress up so they appear feminine is nothing at all like men being exclusively physically attracted to other men. (You can do the same sentence to apply to women.)

although if I am going to be nit picky I might say that it isn't impossible for a trans man to be sexually attracted to men- therefore rendering those two things one and the same (albeit only in that specific example!)

[Bluepolkadots42]

@wellbehavedwomen what you've said here: 'if there's nothing wrong with gender dysphoric kids, why are we consideringly medical interventions? And why is nobody really demanding that we look at why so many kids with mental health problems - which this cohort clearly do have, unrelated to the dysphoria, because mental health problems in autistic kids are the norm and not the exception - want to transition, and what drives that desire? Why is it bigoted for parents and others to express concerns? We're talking drug treatments for life, carrying proven and serious risks, and the most serious and invasive forms of surgery imaginable, should transition hold. 89% plus will outgrow dysphoria without hormone blockers, yet 100% transition with them. That's a massive issue, and it's not transphobic to sound the alarm.'

Has really got me thinking- especially the stats you use at the end- thank you for sharing your views.

[hazandduck]

@Bluepolkadots42

I like to think I believe strongly in free speech.
I have been lurking on numerous threads about trans-rights and the trans community- there were lots when JK Rowling published that blog- and I was keen to read threads covering both sides of the debate to ensure any conclusions I drew were informed.

One thing that did spring to my mind- particularly when reading comments from posters who expressed real concern about rises in the number of children identifying as trans- was whether people say 40 or 50 years ago were making similar comments except about gay people? I suspect 50 years ago it was very rare for children to openly say they identified as gay because of the social context at the time, (but that doesn't mean they didn't exist) however there would surely have been more gay people in their late teens/early 20s being open about their sexuality leading to some form of concern for some members of society. I don't really know where I'm going next with this rambling thought- but interested in others' views.

I do agree with you. I am gender critical but part of me wonders if I do come across like the homophobes of yesteryear. Parts of how I feel don’t sit comfortably with me as an old school lefty. It’s like a head butt of not wanting to be homophobic, (which I think some anti-trans views stem from), but also not wanting to be sexist (which I think gender ideology is). It’s such a nuanced issue. And the fact I find myself nodding at Daily Mail articles and along with Piers makes me feel a bit sick! Makes me wonder if it’s me that’s changed? Not wording it very well here.

[nauticant]

A transman being physically attracted to men is not an example of a person being gay. Unless you're going to change the meaning of the word "gay". Which would be homophobic.

[Kit19]

The difference bluepolkadots was that gay ppl just wanted the same rights as straight ppl

Trans ppl already have the same rights as everyone else but TW want the same rights as women too and that affects all women. Once women are no longer defined as adult human females, but include male bodied ppl then there are no women’s rights

[TorkTorkBam]

I keeping hearing trans allies saying that trans people have worse mental health than others.

I can't get my head around how those trans allies then declare that ALL those mental health problems in ALL those individuals are CAUSED by being trans and we must NEVER even suggest that identifying as trans could be a SYMPTOM of something else.

No consideration for the complexity of real people. Actual real life trans identifying people get hurt by the one-size fits all approach. It is inhuman.

Those allies remind me of the saying With friends like these who needs enemies?

[OvaHere]

Personally I don't view a trans woman in my changing space as any more a threat to me than a straight woman or a gay woman because I don't believe in that context someone's gender is what is the threat, but their personality is (e.g. murderous psycho could be of any gender). But I appreciate we all have a right to feel differently on these matters.

Yes they could be of any gender but I think it's very important to be clear that in all official crime statistics 'murderous psycho's' are overwhelmingly of the male sex regardless of any self described identities.

I feel like you need to go back to the basics and ask the question why we segregate by sex in the first place? What purpose does it serve?

[EweSurname]

She is magnificent

[SophocIestheFox]

Just when you thought you couldn’t love here more, she takes a swipe at the cleverest boy in the sixth form

[RuffleCrow]

Being gay is not something that's happened as a result of sudden social contagion. There is a demonstrable history of gay people existing and facing pèrsecution. Transgenderism is about 10 years old. Before that there were transsexuals, agps, cross dressers but nothing that really matches the 'male soul in a female body' lie we're expected to believe today.

[wellbehavedwomen]

Janice Turner telling Owen Jones to slither back to his slimy little place.

@Bluepolkadots42, there's evidence on desistance rates here.

Evidence on how many girls are now affected here.

The politicisation is a huge issue. It's becoming impossible to conduct research that might in any way raise questions around transition - academics don't want to touch it, because the risks to career and reputation are too great - and it's also worrying that questions around the standard of care at GIDS - which is a completely different question to whether young people should transition: it's solely about the care standards available - are also seen as an attack. Their own safeguarding lead is suing them, which is nothing - nothing to do with whether kids should be transitioned. Yet the rage at the Newsnight piece on those care standards has been huge. Any views that aren't wholly positive are seen as transphobic. That's a toxic environment, for any discussion around care for a very vulnerable cohort.

I have children with ASD dx, by the way. Many women here do. And you don't need me to tell you, given your career path, how exceptionally challenging adolescence is for that group of girls. Exponentially more so than it is for neurotypical peers. The sensory side alone must make breast development and periods pretty horrendous for many. And the male attention side, for girls struggling to manage and parse social interactions to begin with, must be really alarming, too. You also don't need me to point out how common anxiety disorders, OCD, etc are amongst people navigating adolescence while autistic. GIDS themselves say that 48% of the kids they see meet criteria, or are already diagnosed. How do we know the dysphoria is a separate and genuine condition, or a symptomatic rejection of the horrors of puberty, given the other elements at play?

Given the extreme nature of the medical pathway, that's an enormous issue.

I also question why kids are now told not that gender shouldn't define them, and that they can express any gender identity or role they like within their healthy sexed body, but that if they have a gender expression and identity that doesn't match their body, their body is wrong. What the hell sort of message is that to send young people? Or, indeed, anyone? Why can't someone dress and express as they please, and still be welcomed as a peer by their sex? Nobody's body is wrong. If someone is so dysphoric that they feel intensely that it is, then yes absolutely we need to consider how best to help them. If the evidence is that hormones and surgery is that best way - a cosmetic facsimile - then I agree, we need to do that. But it's a way to alleviate distress. It's not really going to change anyone's sex. Why are we now being told to accept, and repeat, what is fundamentally a lie? And why is it seen as "conversion therapy" to suggest that no, actually, we need to try to support people to feel that both their bodies and their gender expression are completely fine, for someone of their sex?

A children's book called, "My body is me!" which shows boys and girls dressed in all manner of clothes, including disabled kids, and has a refrain, "I am my body, my body is me. It's a wonderful thing, I'm sure you'll agree!" and talks about how diverse we are, and how everyone matters and is fine just as they are, is banned from Amazon. For transphobia. Amazon, who will sell the most hideously misogynist tomes, books that claim being gay is sinful and can be cured, and Mein fucking Kampf. Won't sell a book on body positivity for kids, because it's transphobic. It'll sell books that tell you boys who like fluffy pink unicorns are really girls, though. And all kids are affected by their environment - all adults, come to that. What they are allowed to see creates what world their inhabit.

Some people are transphobic in the true sense. Will discriminate in employment or housing, will harass in the street, will feel distaste. The problem with the comparison is that there are genuine issues around transition - in health terms for young people, and in feminist terms if male people try to insist that they can access women's spaces on their subjective and personal identity, with no regard for the emotional costs to women, let alone the reality that transition doesn't alter offending risk. There are no such issues with sexuality.

Sorry that this is so long - obviously it's an issue also close to my heart! Would love to talk more about it, really. Fortunately I know other women with kids on the spectrum who are also interested in it.