Jo Maugham

[GoodbyePorpoiseSpit]

I follow Jo on Twitter and feel that the GoodLaw project is a needed and good thing when it comes to holding ministers/gov spending to account. He seems to take refuge in the rule of law and facts .... so, so WHY after the recent ruling on puberty blockers is he tweeting and retweeting Trans folk who are sharing (in emotive and extra detail) their experience post ruling. What his deal?? What’s his skin in the game? Looked through some old tweets and he really seems to have come down hard against women’s rights.
Ca anyone explain his deal here?

a phalanx of wealthy, white, middle-class cis women

Its astonishing isn't it.

I mean, he is the epitome of the wealthy, white, middle-class 'cis' man - yet he has decided thats the unverified/unevidenced accusation he wants to sling.

With a military term thrown in. I mean What the actual fuck.

The erasure of women including Linda Bellos, Allison Bailey or indeed Kiera Bell, in that comment about “white posh women” is astonishing. It is almost like, when women of colour speak, Maugham and his ilk neither see nor hear them...

Exactly. Speaking as a woman of colour I'm sick of it. However, I note that while many of my white colleagues have blocked I have not. Maybe he truly doesn't see us. I also remain unblocked by Owen Jones and Amnesty Colm

Hulo If it looks like a pattern... not seen or patronised?

its fucking outrageous- i just cant...

@Forgotthebins

The erasure of women including Linda Bellos, Allison Bailey or indeed Kiera Bell, in that comment about “white posh women” is astonishing. It is almost like, when women of colour speak, Maugham and his ilk neither see nor hear them...

Indeed. It's astonishingly blind.

This entire episode was precipitated by Keira Bell, for fuck's sake. The opposite of the bogey women he is inventing.

But, I've heard this refrain, over and over. Women with a platform, women with voice, women with power or money, women who can articulate, those are not the women to be heard.

The women to be heard are those with no power, no money, no platform, no articulation no voice, and as I've said before, no chance.

He only wants to listen to the women he can't hear.

Funny that.

And I just want to add, that the women who will be in most affected by this ideology, are those who have no power. In rape refuges, prison, homeless shelters, psychiatric wards.

All these women are being gaslit.

It's all women Jolyon. All of them.

His latest tweets on the Tavi report are practically incoherent.

Here you go, Jolly-on, a nice, clear explanation so you can actually understand Bell V Tavistock.

www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=9dd7d084-1f07-471b-8ec3-ae2fceaa349f

Thank goodness, Jolyon is standing up for the most oppressed people in the world: -like 42 year old millionaire white trans weightlifter Laurel hubbard who won gold in women's weightlifting against those oh so posh, privileged cis Samoan girls.

This movement is unbelievable. They are such liars.

Considering the amount of personal capital Maugham is investing in this, in as public a way as possible, should the trans person on whose behalf he's crusading think about desisting, they'd be facing a daunting journey back.

He's a wealthy, middle-class (if not higher) middle-aged white "cis" man. Where's his privilege check?

Ah thats different though, as he is apparently using his privilege to speak up for those discriminated against. That anyone else doing so is apparently wrong for 'speaking for' or 'speaking over' or 'not centering trans voices' is not the point and should be forgotten while discussing dear Jo.

😬 @VulvaPerson

He is still unable to process basic facts...

If you look at the evidence - including from the UK - it tells you that allowing gender incongruent children and teenagers to 'affirm' in their chosen gender reduces suicide risks. Strip away all the sound and the fury and what last week's judgment means is more cases like this.
twitter.com/JolyonMaugham/status/1338190630103756800?s=19

Of course, any fair judicial process would have heard from trans children/young adults about the benefits of puberty blockers. But the Divisional Court, in a manner I am still shocked by today, declined to hear from any voice representing their interests.

Puberty blockers are used throughout the world. They are used because transgender teenagers overwhelmingly 'affirm' and unless you arrest their puberty you cruelly force them to live a life where their body - eg an adam's apple, a deep voice - is incongruent with their gender.

their body - eg an adam's apple, a deep voice - is incongruent with their gender.

Is it just me, or is he starting to sound positively transphobic - stating that people have to physically "conform" to their gender? Isn't that like 2017's script?

Is he going to go and tell Alex Drummond off for being incongruent with their gender?

Of course, any fair judicial process would have heard from trans children/young adults about the benefits of puberty blockers.

He still struggling to read the judgement or something?

declined to hear from any voice representing their interests

That was the Tavistock's job, was it not? And they failed. Is he salty about Mermaids and Stonewall being rejected? Listening to Susie in the aftermath, I can see why.

I thought the message how was “no one is born in the wrong body.” Indeed, a penis can be a female organ now, so we are told. Also,jo is focusing on the effects of puberty on young men. But what we’ve learned from the Tavistocks paper is that women are having puberty blocked very early before their first growth spurt which means they will grow into very short men. He doesn’t seem to be so concerned about gender incongruence in young women.

where their body - eg an adam's apple, a deep voice - is incongruent with their gender.

Those are both benefits for males and if a girl takes cross sex hormones one of the things it does is lower her voice for life. Where does he list the specific benefits for girls?

"Their chosen gender". I thought it wasn't a choice.

That aside, what level of cognitive dissonance is required to think that full gender transition and lifelong hormones, sterility and impaired sexual function is a good thing? That if it could be dealt with in a way that didn't involve medication and surgery that we wouldn't move heaven and earth to prevent children and young adults having to go through such traumatic, risky and damaging procedures?

And why, Jolyon, do kids have to physically transition but middle aged men only need frocks, make up, a bad wig and an unlikely female name?

What on earth is the point of turning healthy girls into tiny men with fragile bones and no functioning adult genitals of any description? What will their lives be like?

Who cares, they're only un-men 🤷‍♀️

@NewlyGranny

What on earth is the point of turning healthy girls into tiny men with fragile bones and no functioning adult genitals of any description? What will their lives be like?

Well they will have the legal capacity of adults but the bodies of children. And perhaps some intellectual impairment due to not going through puberty.

They won’t be sexually attractive to most gay/ straight adults because they are attracted to ADULT bodies not pre pubescent children's bodies.

They won’t be able to orgasm. In fact the XX people will suffer terrible pain if they do.

So I don’t know where that leaves them in terms of adult / sexual / intimate relationships.

Of course they won’t be able to have biological children.

We don’t know how it will affect their physical and mental health long term to take CSH.

It’s all a big experiment.

From Jo Bartosch' article about Susan Evans:

www.telegraph.co.uk/health-fitness/body/right-blow-whistle-tavistock-clinic-puberty-blockers/

Evans has worked for the NHS her entire life, and met her husband, Marcus, who was also in the field of psychoanalytic practice, when training in Springfield Hospital in Tooting Bec, south-west London. “What drew me to therapeutic practice was trying to understand the internal emotional worlds of other people,” she says, “because with understanding comes an improved experience of life. I had an instinct that drugs and physical treatments were never going to provide an answer for people in emotional distress.”

(My bold).

I just still find it incredible that anyone would think it a good idea to take a healthy body and inflict surgery, and iatrogenic harm, leading to medicalisation for life.

Good health is such a blessing in life. Of course good mental health is also important but poor physical health will further impact mental health. No healthy child or young adult should be given treatment that causes real physical harm. How is that difficult to understand?

Maugham is now attempting to discredit all of the expert witnesses buses by Keira Bell, and is still banging on about the fact that trans voices were not heard, and that Mermaids / Stonewall were not allowed to intervene.

twitter.com/JolyonMaugham/status/1338751267015888900?s=19

He's like a dog with a bone, and his total denial of facts and his inability to understand the judgement does not looks good.

He's going to be speaking to an increasingly niche audience with these arguments. People who already agree with him. Ongoing conspiracy-theoryesque threads feel a little desperate. There is a zealotry to his approach that reasonable people will find off-putting, especially when the facts laid out in court demonstrate how woeful the Tavistock's procedures have been.