Julie Bindel piece interviewing a now-dissenting Yogyakarta drafter

[NecessaryScene1]

Interesting new piece in The Critic:

Looks like I accidentally hit "post".

The trans rights that trump all

Having considered the Principles’ implications for women, Wintemute says he should have challenged references to “self-defined gender identity” and to “changes to identity documents [being] recognised in all contexts” in Principle 3. “If I had thought through the implications of Principle 3,” says Wintemute, “I would have had to consider the potential for conflict with women’s rights, but I didn’t.” Neither, so far as he knows, did anyone else at the meeting at which the Principles were drafted. “Women’s rights weren’t raised.”

Given the number of human rights experts at the meeting, including a dozen former UN special rapporteurs and committee members, this was a surprising failing, Wintemute admits. The European Convention on Human Rights makes very clear that certain rights may be restricted if they impact on “the rights and freedoms of others”.

He explains: “There was a feeling that transgender people have suffered and they are saying this is what is needed — the implications of no surgery and self-ID had not dawned on us back in 2006. So far as I remember nobody was thinking about males with intact genitals gaining access to women’s spaces.”

'The majority of the 2006 Yogyakarta signatories were men and trans men. “The issue of access to single-sex spaces largely affects women and not men. So it was easy for the men in the group to be swept along by concern for LGBT rights and ignore this issue,” '

It is a very interesting piece. The architect of the Yogyakarta principles sounds a bit gc, doesn't he?

@ArabellaScott

It is a very interesting piece. The architect of the Yogyakarta principles sounds a bit gc, doesn't he?

The natural conclusion of thinking through how such proposals will affect females.

I think this should be vitally important. But probably it will be air brushed and ignored.

Sounds like another classic example of what happens when you don't have women sufficiently represented at the table - or only "represented" by males.

It's in The Critic so will be ignored, sadly. Or at best, denounced because it's in The Critic.

It's got to be picked up by a left wing journal to be taken seriously and we've got a long wait before that happens. So long as only right wing media, or those perceived to be right wing, are the only ones carrying even vaguely gc stories then women's sex-based rights will be regarded as a right wing issue.

Incidentally I hate when people recommend using the Yog. principle of "Don't ask people their pronouns/gender ID" (paraphrased as can't remember exact wording) as a response to being asked to share pronouns in signatures/at meetings. While it might seem a useful response, these "principles' were, as shown here, drawn up by a group with their own agenda, with little or no input from women or consideration of women's rights, and have AFAIK no particular authority, so we should not be quoting and legitimising them, even when it might occasionally seem to suit our purposes.

Then Wintemute should do something to rectify this, perhaps?

Something more than a, "Woops"?

@ahagwearsapointybonnet

Sounds like another classic example of what happens when you don't have women sufficiently represented at the table - or only "represented" by males.

Yes!

Is "The Critic" right wing though? I thought it was balanced

@ArabellaScott

'The majority of the 2006 Yogyakarta signatories were men and trans men. “The issue of access to single-sex spaces largely affects women and not men. So it was easy for the men in the group to be swept along by concern for LGBT rights and ignore this issue,” '

There were some women there as well, including Mary Robinson, former president of Ireland.

Full list here:
yogyakartaprinciples.org/annex/

Vitit Muntarbhorn, international human rights expert and professor of law at Chulalongkorn University in Bangkok, is another of the original authors of the Principles. But unlike Wintemute he remains steadfast in his support for the notion of “gender identity” and does not accept that this has led to an erosion of women’s sex-based rights. “When you talk about trans women in toilets, well, many countries don’t have toilets, so how can that be a primary concern?”

That's a coherent argument by professor muntabhorn 🤔

@ahagwearsapointybonnet

Incidentally I hate when people recommend using the Yog. principle of "Don't ask people their pronouns/gender ID" (paraphrased as can't remember exact wording) as a response to being asked to share pronouns in signatures/at meetings. While it might seem a useful response, these "principles' were, as shown here, drawn up by a group with their own agenda, with little or no input from women or consideration of women's rights, and have AFAIK no particular authority, so we should not be quoting and legitimising them, even when it might occasionally seem to suit our purposes.

I have done this, but my purpose is not to legitimise them, but to try to draw attention to the potential conflicts within their own movement, and try to encourage people to think a bit more about what they're doing.

I actually agree with this principle that it is wrong to force people to 'out' themselves, whether they are LGB or identify as transgender, when they may not wish to do so.

It seems that many TRAs disagree with this particular principle even though they might cite the Yogyakarta principles as an authority when it suits them. I am just drawing their attention to the fact that they seem to pick and choose which bits they want to agree with. I think it is hypocritical to say 'Yogyakarta principles represent international best practice' followed by 'you must out yourself by declaring pronouns'.

What happened at the meeting was a fore runner of what's happened to institutions. A bunch of well meaning but unthinking people bamboozled by activists with an agenda to replace sex with gender identity. You would expect better of human rights experts.

“When you talk about trans women in toilets, well, many countries don’t have toilets, so how can that be a primary concern?”

You talk about the problems of obesity. Well, the population of many countries struggle to meet their daily caloric and nutritional needs so how can that be a primary concern.

Definitely makes sense.

I was very pleased to read this. In fact I wondered what was going on behind the scenes so to speak when I saw the professor's name on this letter in January along with Heather Brunskell-Evans, also a King's academic.
sites.google.com/view/open-letter-stock-freedom/home
The Law School Robert Wintemute works in is the home of the Future of Legal Gender project which is unsuccessfully trying to get rid of legal sex, something he describes now as outrageous (the idea, not the project). He sat in front of me at one of their open meetings back in 2019.

Its good to see him come out against this now, and I expect this will be quite influential. Admitting you forgot to consider women is pulling a big brick out of the wall.

And of course women (and mumsnet) made it absolutely clear to the FLAG project that we had to be considered, much to their chagrin.

Robert heard that feedback then at that meeting. Well done mumsnet.

@ahagwearsapointybonnet

Incidentally I hate when people recommend using the Yog. principle of "Don't ask people their pronouns/gender ID" (paraphrased as can't remember exact wording) as a response to being asked to share pronouns in signatures/at meetings. While it might seem a useful response, these "principles' were, as shown here, drawn up by a group with their own agenda, with little or no input from women or consideration of women's rights, and have AFAIK no particular authority, so we should not be quoting and legitimising them, even when it might occasionally seem to suit our purposes.

Whats your alternative suggestion for a workplace that has been captured? Instead of just criticising, offer a viable alternative because women are facing this agenda in their everyday lives and it has consequenses.

@GNCQ

Is "The Critic" right wing though? I thought it was balanced

It isn't right wing, but the fact that it's hosted right wing people such as David Starkey is enough to condemn it in some people's minds - the sort of people, unfortunately, who need winning over. Same has happened with Quillette (with knobs on) and people have even started apologising for using Substack, which is now regarded as tervy because it hosts gc accounts.

Honestly there are people out there who wouldn't believe the Earth went round the sun if the wrong person affirmed it.

But anyway - great that this article is out there at all.

So it's not woke enough basically...

Very interesting article. I recognised his name - probably from when he signed the kathleen stock support letter. I had no idea he was one of the ones who signed the yogyakarta principles.

What stood out for me was how recent the realisation was, and how ppl who really ought to be aware are completely unaware, and how odd that is. I was already eyes open and reading here & elsewhere by the time he was giving his summer school talk in summer 2018. And he was really surprised to find out that if you point to a manifestation of the conflict of rights, and acknowledge that other ppl have needs too, you will have stepped over an invisible line. Yet he had been working on the exact field of trans rights.

Bindel cites the group recently set up to push the arguments for repeal of the GRA.

She, and the professor touch on some of them, but there are any more, once you start looking into the real life consequences for women and girls, and the nightmare it has created for safeguarding.

www.repealthegra.org/the-argument-for-repeal

It is unconscionable that a professor of human rights law actually just forgot women not only exist, but are supposed to have human rights too.

He has an awful lot of work to do, to make up for this mistake.

I want to be shocked that women are never thought of but I'm not.

I did a lot of research about the people involved in the Yog principles, they were named on Wikipedia and elsewhere. One by one many of the men on Wiki disappeared. I suspect they have reappeared under different identities. Wiki's yog page has completly changed over the three or four years I've watched it. I recognised a name of a man that I know who worked for a children's NGO I worked at, with a dodgy cloud over him when he was fired. He's vanished from the page now.

I did a lot of research about the people involved in the Yog principles, they were named on Wikipedia and elsewhere. One by one many of the men on Wiki disappeared. I suspect they have reappeared under different identities.

What do you mean by different identities? The people involved are listed here:

<a class="break-all" href="https://web.archive.org/web/20161030033904/yogyakartaprinciples.org/annex/" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">web.archive.org/web/20161030033904/yogyakartaprinciples.org/annex/

<a class="break-all" href="https://web.archive.org/web/20171201180854/www.yogyakartaprinciples.org/signatories-yp10/" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">web.archive.org/web/20171201180854/www.yogyakartaprinciples.org/signatories-yp10/

I just checked these archived pages and the lists of names are identical to the ones on the current pages.