The judgment in Keira Bell's case will be given tomorrow

[MaudTheInvincible]

The judgment of the Tavistock's appeal of the case will be given at 2pm.

www.gov.uk/government/publications/royal-courts-of-justice-cause-list/royal-courts-of-justice-daily-cause-list

Brave Keira. You have done so much to protect children from ideologically driven healthcare around the world. Your integrity and courage is inspiring and rare in this ridiculous day and age. 💚🤍💜

Well summarised, notbad.

A couple of things really jump out at me. Firstly, the point already well made by several others about the narrative of being an “infertile woman” (yes, those scare quotes are carefully chosen). I became an infertile woman through experiences that only women- females, possessors of XX chromosomes- can have. Endometriosis, adenomyosis, use of Triptorelin (aka puberty blockers), oophrectomy, hysterectomy. There is no parallel at all between this and anything that a natal male might experience. If you’ve learned nothing else here, butterfly, I hope that you have managed to take on board the utter crassness and real offensiveness of your position on this, and as they say, do better on this topic.

The other is the damage caused by this notion of hanging your happiness, your sense of self, and your identity off the hook of other people’s perceptions. What do they think of me? What do they perceive me to be? How are they going to respond to me? Trans or not, this is a recipe for psychological disaster. A person can never be happy with their welfare so utterly in the control of others, and not even their loved ones, but any Tom Dick or Harriet they should happen to meet in the street. This will always fail. Someone- a child, a mean person, someone preoccupied with their own matters- will fail that test. And what then?

Healthy children learn that their happiness is in their control.

You’ve done better than most who blow by these parts to educate us, though, butterfly, so well done on that. If you’re surprised that women here have engaged respectfully, then perhaps this suggests something about your preconceptions of the place.

I have actually found Butterfly's posts really interesting and I've been glad to see some positive engagement between the two sides.

But the comment about being an infertile woman was tone deaf. A sperm-producing individual, who chooses at a young age to forego the preservation of sperm and to accept medical treatment that was known to cause the loss of (male) fertility, is in no way an infertile woman. The experience of Butterfly is unique to mtf transitioners. That experience is in no way comparable to the women sharing stories on the infertility board on Mumsnet - the two sides would have nothing in common. Similarly, a woman suddenly finding out in her mid-teens that she hasn't started her period because she was born without a womb is not the same as a male-bodied teenager who chooses to forego puberty and the opportunity to sire a child. These experiences are either wholly female experiences or wholly trans ones. There is no overlap.

A woman whose reproductive system is not functioning as it should is still a woman undergoing a uniquely female experience. Not all women will share that experience but only women will have that experience.

In the same way, a ftm transitioner who undergoes a hysterectomy can lay no claim to being an infertile male. A man struggling with low sperm count (say) does not share his experience with transmen.

This point must be crystal clear.

I have actually found Butterfly's posts really interesting and I've been glad to see some positive engagement between the two sides

Same, it’s been an interesting and informative read. I had noted (as a PP pointed out) that not a single question has been asked of the women engaging with them, the focus entirely on Butterfly. Very illuminating.

"That's enough about me, I'm off now."

I'd maybe cut butterfly some slack, because she's been asked a lot of questions about her own opinions and experiences, and as far as I can tell has been genuinely trying to answer them!

What, @LongBlobson, someone deliberately comes onto a mum's discussion board. They are clearly reeking of male entitlement and talks over/at the wimmin. Thinks that Woman is a costume. Flounces off when not celebrated. No thank you.
A discussion would have been interesting
A lecture was not.

*he

Ugh just typed a long reply and lost it, now I have to go to work!

In summary, I get why you're upset. I perceived it differently, I thought butterfly was making some effort to honestly and openly answer a lot of very challenging questions.

I became an infertile woman through experiences that only women- females, possessors of XX chromosomes- can have. Endometriosis, adenomyosis, use of Triptorelin (aka puberty blockers), oophrectomy, hysterectomy.

Not only is there no parallel to the male experience, there’s a crucial difference for these young girls. Your infertility is a result of a disease process and its treatment. These girls are rendered infertile deliberately to treat an mental incongruence that can only be described using stereotypes at the age of 11. It was one of the most awful aspects of the defence case in the original ruling:

“Some females are infertile/asexual as adults, so why does it matter if we make a few that way at this age?”

It’s must be awful enough to have it taken from you by nature , I can’t imagine how awful it must be for infertile women to see it deliberately taken from children and being hand waved away as no big deal.

As a society we are taking fertility and sexual function from children on purpose supposedly to help their inner turmoil.

“I’m infertile and asexual because doctors said if they gave me drugs I’d be happier with who I am.”

And we now know it doesn’t help. Those who wish to perpetuate this pathway should be ashamed of themselves.

I hope this post makes sense Soph, I’m not trying to diminish your experience in comparison.

I think that butterfly has tried her best to answer questions and she has been polite and informative.

What I think is really sad is that, if it weren't for the hostile gender identity atmosphere we would all have been a lot more accepting and supportive of her and her engagement.

It does seem to me that there is a prickly defensiveness from us, even for a relatively friendly visitor like Butterfly. Why is this? Where has this come from?

It looks to me as though the people who would claim to be advocating for Butterfly have just made it worse for her. None of us want this.

Tbf Rabbit, I think we all know where our defensiveness comes from. Women are KILLED daily, by men.
Butterfly may be honestly trying to engage with us but to be tone deaf to what is happening to women all around us is telling, no?

It does seem to me that there is a prickly defensiveness from us, even for a relatively friendly visitor like Butterfly. Why is this? Where has this come from?

For me it's a) describing biological reality as 'gaslighting' and b) comparing their plight to that of infertile women. And not apologising or reflecting when both of those things were pointed out.

It was on this board some years ago that a regular transwoman poster told me that my infertility wasn't as bad as theirs because 'at least I had a womb'. They had fathered children.

It's unbelievably tone deaf to come onto a mostly female site and demand that we validate their female identity.

No offence taken, notbad, you’ve explained it well again.

I think, rabbit, the issue is that for a lot of us we are quite disillusioned that no matter how kindly or in however flowery terms it is expressed, what it boils down to is women’s lives and physical realities being appropriated, dismissed, seen as lesser, seen as available to meet the needs of male people. Butterfly has been polite and thoughtful, but the message is still “woman can be a state of mind”, and for those of us to whom “being a woman” is an inescapable physical reality, the difference seems irreconcilable as it stands.

It’s true that people such as butterfly - dysphoric/transsexual in the old, discarded terminology- would previously have enjoyed a great deal more latitude than is currently available, but if that is causing issues, then the blame lies at the door of the people making trans into an identity, and blurring all distinction between male and female people, and not solely with women for disagreeing with that.

In summary, I get why you're upset. I perceived it differently, I thought butterfly was making some effort to honestly and openly answer a lot of very challenging questions

But then when the questioning changed tone and women explained they were upset about some aspects of what was being said butterfly left

butterfly wanted to educate…she did not want to be educated

For me, it was these paragraphs:

Does that mean I think they should be prevented from accessing blockers at a young age, or moving onto CSH/HRT whatever you want to call it?

Quite aside from that being an incredibly heartless way of looking at things; one which completely disregards the multi-component nature of the trans kid experience, focussing on aesthetic physical changes alone and concerning itself largely with the comfort of an external observer; it's also fundamentally unfair and cannot help but feed into a poisonous narrative that minimises, infantilises and ultimately rides roughshod over the experiences of trans boys, casting them as tragic victims who have no idea what they're doing, hypnotised by the evil tune of the GNRH Analogue pied piper leading them astray.

I resent being called “heartless” for wanting to challenge the idea of girls being given PBs and wrong sex hormones.

I resent being told I am disregarding the complex nature of these children’s experiences.

I resent being told I am only focussed on aesthetic physical changes, as if the ruination of these girls’ bodies from inside out is such a thing.

I resent being told it’s my comfort that leads me to this challenge, rather than the ultimate welfare of these children.

I resent being told I am minimising their experiences, rather than thinking their underlying trauma/ASD/homosexuality/anxiety/ depression (delete as applicable) should not be treated by irreversible hormone treatments.

I resent being told I am infantilising children and casting them as not knowing what they’re doing while at the same time receiving no explanation as to how anyone thinks children as young as 10 or 11 can consent and fully comprehend the magnitude of their decisions.

It read to me as if our legitimate concerns about girls were being dismissed and no subsequent posts altered my view.

I think it's important to look at whether there is a sense of equality in the conversation, and not just that its a nice, civil tone. Are both parties sharing discussion equally as people with the same amount of inner life, value, interest? Is there reciprocation going on?

Or is one party the focus and its an educational visit intended to teach women to open their eyes to the complexity and deep emotional experience of someone male born, who actually is showing no reciprocal interest in them as equals with equal complexity, deep emotional experiences of their own to share? Is there a feel of a teacher speaking to those who need to learn? Or are you seeing women discussing together on equal terms?

We see over and over again on the FWR board and have for years, a position summarised as: if you just listened long enough and understood enough about what it was like to be a TW, you'd agree. It's the 'get educated' position.

The problem is that many women's position is 'it's not that we don't understand, it's that you don't see any reciprocal need to hear or understand women's needs'. Education is a one way thing, moving from male born to female born people, and regards the entire female voice of 'this doesn't work for us' as just faulty in its thinking.

Butt's starting position was that mumsnet is part of a reactionary backlash based on moral panic and opened up by saying "now we've got that out of the way".

We were only ever addressed as the moral panickers that the elder statesmen of trans market us as.

It's fascinating how oblivious to their own offensiveness this makes them.

Mandu Reid falls into this trap too, she repeated the "trans women are like black women" trope last week.

It’s true that people such as butterfly - dysphoric/transsexual in the old, discarded terminology- would previously have enjoyed a great deal more latitude than is currently available, but if that is causing issues, then the blame lies at the door of the people making trans into an identity, and blurring all distinction between male and female people, and not solely with women for disagreeing with that.

But don't forget that it was transsexuals who campaigned for the GRA and are also campaigning for self ID. Groups like Press for Change always included transgender people and cross dressers as well as transsexuals.

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3463920-Lets-go-back-to-2007?pg=1

the conversation swerved completely away from the brilliant Keira Bell and especially from girls being put on unevidenced medical pathways. (This is not a dig at Butterfly, it is as much about the wider set up or structure or skew that reflects so much of both our social landscape and internal landscapes.).

It's that the importance of one sex's feelings and experiences is always placed higher than that of the other.

I do appreciate you answering questions fully and openly, Butterfly. It'd be great if we could all have more conversations in which all parties are respectful of each other and able to discuss things in a friendly way. (This is somewhat hampered by the Rules of this board, which can make conversation a bit clunky, to say the least.)

It does seem to me that there is a prickly defensiveness from us, even for a relatively friendly visitor like Butterfly. Why is this? Where has this come from?

Because as usual it all boils down to us women “being educated”?

“Hopefully you learned something”, “you’re welcome to invite me onto another thread as long as we keep the discussion to things I want to talk about”.

#nothankyou

Well put, @TooWicked.
I thought the most interesting thing that Butterfly let out of the bag was that they had presented themselves dishonestly to their medics.

That bit about ' poor me, I normally wore jeans/ tee shirt but HAD to wear dresses to see the medics'

It puts one in mind of One Flew Over The Cuckoo's Nest. So? So you managed to persuade the medics that you were nuts to get your chosen drugs? Bully for you. Deception all the way down.

[quote OldCrone]It’s true that people such as butterfly - dysphoric/transsexual in the old, discarded terminology- would previously have enjoyed a great deal more latitude than is currently available, but if that is causing issues, then the blame lies at the door of the people making trans into an identity, and blurring all distinction between male and female people, and not solely with women for disagreeing with that.

But don't forget that it was transsexuals who campaigned for the GRA and are also campaigning for self ID. Groups like Press for Change always included transgender people and cross dressers as well as transsexuals.

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3463920-Lets-go-back-to-2007?pg=1[/quote]
Good point old crone . As ever, the goal posts aren’t quite where we imagine them to be.

Good posts, artichoke.

@oldwomanwhoruns

Well put, *@TooWicked*. I thought the most interesting thing that Butterfly let out of the bag was that they had presented themselves dishonestly to their medics.

That bit about ' poor me, I normally wore jeans/ tee shirt but HAD to wear dresses to see the medics'

It puts one in mind of One Flew Over The Cuckoo's Nest. So? So you managed to persuade the medics that you were nuts to get your chosen drugs? Bully for you. Deception all the way down.

I didn't get that from what Butterfly was saying. I think the point was, Butterfly had to dress in a skirt in order to be viewed as a girl by those dispensing treatment. It was more of a comment on the assumptions by the medics, I think.

I get the impression that things have changed and you no longer have to wear skirts to be considered 'female on the inside' or whatever.

Of course, this all opens much deeper questions about what it means to be a girl, and clothing and stereotypes etc. but I didn't read that paragraph as an explanation of how Butterfly 'deceived' the medics.