TT Exulansic Youtube

[Fleek]

I've been watching TT Exulansic's videos on YouTube having seen a link to them on here. I have learnt so much - what she is sharing is so necessary in terms of this debate. I'm also finding them really upsetting. I'm so shocked by what I've seen and just wanted to talk about them here. If you haven't watched any yet, please do.

I have a condition which has meant having plastic surgery to make my body look more 'normal'. I've had multiple, very painful surgeries which have left me in a degree of chronic pain but ultimately, I have achieved my goal in that I now have a much more normal looking body which it is easier to go through life with. These surgeries have had a clear medical benefit beyond my appearance being changed, just to be clear. I have a medical condition which has objective markers. There is evidence having gone through these surgeries, I will now have better physical health in my old age and will be less likely to experience certain complications which the condition can end up causing so the benefits definitely aren't just cosmetic - it's just the cosmetic benefits meant a lot to me as a patient. My body was 'wrong' and that was badly affecting my mental health and so I've put myself through a lot to make it look 'right.'

So there I am with having gone through this journey and so I think watching these videos on YT feels that little bit more personal in some ways, even though I don't have gender dysphoria and my surgeries were completely different. I knew already that things like constructing a 'penis' out of someone's arm was utterly barbaric and had a high failure rate and I knew there could be complications with attempting to construct a vagina. I just had no idea how frequently there were complications and how dangerous this journey is. I suddenly have the view that it must be almost impossible to go through them safely - at the very least you are risking fissures and strictures and those can lead to serious complications. Just taking testosterone is likely to lead to heart damage, too. There are going to be so many people who go through these operations and who die prematurely because they end up with sepsis or other infections.

I just watched the latest video on Jazz. I felt sick to my stomach at that one in particular. How has this poor kid got any kind of future? Jazz is severely depressed, 150 pounds overweight, has no sexual functioning at all, has already experienced multiple surgeries and complications and is likely to experience more. It's a crime to be doing this to vulnerable young people. If Jazz hadn't had these surgeries, we'd be looking at a young man embarking on a degree at Harvard, perhaps at the beginning of a journey where he felt comfortable with his sex and his sexuality. He'd be out having fun. My surgeries were so incredibly tough but on balance, they were worth it and while I'm in pain here and there, I don't have any additional complications which will actually threaten my life. That isn't the case with trans surgeries. Surgeons are literally butchering healthy bodies. They must know they are. How have things been allowed to go in this direction? (I know the answer to that really)

Surely if people with CAIS want continued access to women's spaces they should be on the side of people protecting women's spaces? Surely if you want GC people on your side you should support the cause of GC people?

Generally they were actually, but after reading the disgusting pile on Clare Graham has received in the now three videos Ex has done on her rather than the fact she's operating within understood medical care structures for dsd and is only an employee of the charity I wouldn't be surprised if they disassociated themselves.

This is doing so much harm to individuals and also any discussion of this within the feminism v trans debate, and is a massive red herring.

Clare Graham is currently on Gettr making defamatory accusations against a GC woman (one brave enough to be the public face of GC resistance, unlike most people here who merely complain on FWR behind the safety of anonymity) of her being obsessed with children's genitals and a pedophile - for asking safeguarding questions. A DARVO tactic straight out of the TRA handbook - Helen Stanisland is having that same accusation levelled at her too for asking the Stanisland Question. Clare has made herself the public face of her organisation, so why shouldn't she be asked questions about what is on her organisation's website?

@MangyInseam

The fact is that many many people think trans people are trans because they have a dsd. Here in Canada, which is behind the UK on this issue, that is one of the most common things you see with the general public. People find it belivable and it compels them to believe that it is just and appropriate to treat such individuals as they sex they identify as.

Those of us who want to maintain the definition of women in law and social convention etc are in a position of having to define who that includes in a way that is not about how people feel or self-identify.

That could be done taking people with real dsds into account, or not doing so. But if those people want their situation to be taken into account, they need to contribute something in terms of what they think taht should look like. And not some soft language about being compassionate - that is what caused this issue in the first place - rather scientific and specific definitions.

Because that's where we are. We are having to try to give objective, scientific, specific definitions of who can count as a woman. Like it or not.

"if those people want their situation to be taken into account, they need to contribute something in terms of what they think that should look like."

They have.

To repeat what I posted above in:

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/4405866-TT-Exulansic-Youtube?msgid=115227754

"IMHO the only analysis of Karyotype vs Phenotype in DSDs that makes any sense in the real world, both as it is now and as we would like to see it as GC Feminists, is the model published by DSD Families."

"The Story of Sex Development"

www.dsdfamilies.org/application/files/4915/7386/0021/ECOPY_Story_of_Sex_Dev_Nov_2019.pdf

CAIS gets a brief mention on page 8 as one of the rare forms of an already rare set of medical conditions.

Where VSDs are concerned, there is no "tidy" answer that ties XX to "absolute femaleness" and XY to "absolute maleness".

If we can accept that, then we can accept that the only rational, moral way of accommodating CAIS XY women/males is to accept that they are, to all intents and purposes "infertile women" (not "infertile men") - and then we can get our eye back on the ball: transgenderism and gender ideology.

It is not that "those people" have not bothered to "contribute something in terms of what they think that should look like" but that other people:

• are not aware of what they have contributed

• or are not bothering to consider what they have contributed

• or do not like what they have contributed.

They are never going to like what they have contributed if by "taking people with DSDs into account" they mean trying to shoehorn the 0.00125% of babies born with CAIS into a definition that suits the other 99.9875% of babies who do not have CAIS.

While Complete Androgen Insensitivity Syndrome (CAIS) represents an estimated 1 in 80,000 births an even smaller number are XX males born with De la Chapelle Syndrome.

Neither of these conditions has any bearing on the fact that a massively greater number of people (though still a small percentage of the population) are unequivocally male or female but believe that they have a "gender identity" at variance with their sex.

People with CAIS and De la Chapelle Syndrome present with biologically-based, objectively verifiable exceptions to the general rule that XX = female woman and XY = male man.

These exceptions do NOT need to verified case-by-case with genetic testing because we are talking about definitions.

In real life, as far as the rest of the world is concerned, the tiny number of CAIS XY males are, functionally to all intents and appearances, infertile women, and XX males are infertile men.

Definitions that have served us well for millennia do not include, and do not need to include, the unverifiable, hypothetical construct of "gender identity", invented in the 1950s by John Money.

The notion that "compassion" is the cause of any confusion about definitions is a straw man argument that has been repeated tirelessly by Exulansic.

I don't know why she does it because she has a fearsome intelligence so it's not because she is stupid.

Calls for compassion arise as a result of the arguments being made now that CAIS women should be registered or re-registered as male and treated as males for all legal and social purposes.

I find it particularly disturbing that "compassion" is then used as the rationale for further stigmatising CAIS women as "males with a disability". This is the "compassion" of a firing squad allowing the target to wear a blindfold.

The "disability" afforded "compassion" is not their distressing medical condition but the fact that people who apparently lack confidence in their ability to challenge gender identity ideology feel that they can bolster their argument by turning the history of human experience on it's head.

Scientific developments that have resulted in the ability to diagnose CAIS without invasive surgery do not mean that we now have a simple lab test to "unmask" males who are deliberately and stealthily impersonating women or who are delusional.

Instead, we have a test that can explain why a tiny number of women who are infertile account for the 1:20,400 to 1:99,100 of males (estimates vary depending on time and location) who have CAIS. This should ensure they receive appropriate health care and also that their families can receive relevant genetic information and guidance.

I believe that the conflation of CAIS women with the much greater number of trans identified males is not only unnecessary and misguided but it is regressive and harmful at a personal and societal level.

Only two of those issues have a call on "compassion", the harm at a personal and societal level. "Compassion" is was not an issue previously and is only a factor now as a result of the staggering lack of compassion and common sense that has erupted across Exulansic's fan base. Those who hang on Exulansic's every word and then parrot those words in every exchange.

I am glad that LangClegsInSpace had those screenshots as evidence because those are the things that horrified me at the time.

Exulansic was a TRA, is using people with VSDs as canon fodder. She has persuaded her fans that the only reason there is a "problem" with CAIS women is that we were all big softies and were gulled into being kind.

She has painted a minuscule group of women as potential sexual predators with the capacity to impregnate, not only without any evidence but against all the evidence.

"Those Who Can Make You Believe Absurdities Can Make You Commit Atrocities"

This is what is being played out right now.

Everyone, do your own thinking. ClaireCAIS have repeatedly linked to easy-read references that are repeatedly ignored. Why?

Because you can't bear to contemplate that Exulansic might have been wrong on this and you might have to revise your ideas and disagree with her?

Because you are frightened that Karen Davis might shout at you and feature you in a sneering video?

Get a grip!

@WarriorN

Surely if people with CAIS want continued access to women's spaces they should be on the side of people protecting women's spaces? Surely if you want GC people on your side you should support the cause of GC people?

Generally they were actually, but after reading the disgusting pile on Clare Graham has received in the now three videos Ex has done on her rather than the fact she's operating within understood medical care structures for dsd and is only an employee of the charity I wouldn't be surprised if they disassociated themselves.

This is doing so much harm to individuals and also any discussion of this within the feminism v trans debate, and is a massive red herring.

So it makes sense for a black person to distance themselves from the anti-racism movement because one fairly trivial anti-racism campaigner and a handful of their supporters said something which was factually true but massively insentive and arguably harmful?

Makes sense. Sarcasm.

If people with CAIS want to be in women's spaces then surely it is batshit crazy not to side with women who will protect women's spaces. If women's spaces exist people with CAIS might be allowed in (in reality - enter unnoticed); whereas if they don't exist people with CAIS can be 100% certain that they won;t have access to women's spaces.

The only way the last paragraph does not make sense is if people with CAIS' priority is the validation that women's spaces provide, as opposed to the reality of them. I have no reason to suppose that people with CAIS use women's spaces for validation, so it seems insane not to side explicitly with people who want to protect them.

WarriorN, Are you referring to CG being associated with 'Genspect'? Is that a registered charity? I thought there were quite a few people associated with that. Or are you referring to a different registered charity?

Generally they were actually, but after reading the disgusting pile on Clare Graham has received in the now three videos Ex has done on her rather than the fact she's operating within understood medical care structures for dsd and is only an employee of the charity I wouldn't be surprised if they disassociated themselves.

I watched those three videos yesterday and found them appalling. They very much undermine the weight I give to Exulansic's core content on gender reassignment. Some of it is so clearly bonkers as well as deeply, deeply unpleasant.

I said at a few pages back that, whilst I had concerns about some of Exulansic's content and tone, I hadn't seen anything remotely close to hate speech or which merited a youtube ban. The newest content has changed my mind, frankly.

I have no idea where the threshold for a ban on youtube is so can't assess whether she's objectively over it or not. I do think it's unfortunate when any feminist voice is shut down by aggressive males, as appears to have happened here. But, in light of the newest content, she's no longer someone I want to engage with in any way. Those three videos crossed a line for me.

Why isn’t it as simple as women are females with XX chromosomes and the very, very few people who have particular DSDs where their Y chromosome is not actually male determining as they cannot react to testosterone (so not caster Semenya et al who have DSDs where they do process testosterone and hence are men, even if that doesn’t happen until puberty). As a committed gender critical feminist I’m happy with that. They look and have been brought up as girls/women, haven’t benefited from testosterone mediated puberty so what difference will it make? They don’t induce the ridiculous cognitive dissonance of seeing a man with a man’s body claiming to be a woman as they are functionally the same as XX women.

Was the reference to what @LilithOfEden said?

I obviously won't go into the substantive issue. However I cannot quite believe that a site called 'Virtuous P**philes' actually openly exists. I would rather not google that term! Or, that any of those referred to as the 'Team' on a website which deals with children would not recognise the whiff of such a thing.

Any organisation/charity dealing with children really needs to be so careful in how it manages itself and carries out it work. And transparency in how it carries out it's work. A lot of the historical sex abuse scandal which have been revealed in Ireland were carried out by abusers who placed themselves in positions where they would have access to children. Voluntary and by joining religious orders. People who were greatly admired and respected by the society of the time. Nobody should be beyond questioning or criticism in the aim to protect children, and prevent sexualising or grooming them. I do hope there is no equivocation about this issue in the stance of any organisation/charity which deals with children.

Maybe I'm wrong about that, though. Maybe those people aren't as supporters on a site called Virtuous p's (or such a red flag site doesn't exist). That may be just an allegation.

@Pennox

Why isn’t it as simple as women are females with XX chromosomes and the very, very few people who have particular DSDs where their Y chromosome is not actually male determining as they cannot react to testosterone (so not caster Semenya et al who have DSDs where they do process testosterone and hence are men, even if that doesn’t happen until puberty). As a committed gender critical feminist I’m happy with that. They look and have been brought up as girls/women, haven’t benefited from testosterone mediated puberty so what difference will it make? They don’t induce the ridiculous cognitive dissonance of seeing a man with a man’s body claiming to be a woman as they are functionally the same as XX women.

That makes a lot of sense to me and the fact that no-one on the DSD side is willing to say this makes me wonder if I am missing something, makes me highly suspicious, and makes me wonder if there is actually a very good reason why people with CAIS should be excluded from women's spaces where possible.

@Cailleach1

WarriorN, Are you referring to CG being associated with 'Genspect'? Is that a registered charity? I thought there were quite a few people associated with that. Or are you referring to a different registered charity?

Dsdfamilies. Karen has then gone on to hound Claire on video about Genspect and it's now apparently severed links to Blanchard and Bailey.

@Cailleach1

Maybe I'm wrong about that, though. Maybe those people aren't as supporters on a site called Virtuous p's (or such a red flag site doesn't exist). That may be just an allegation.

I watched the start of something by Karen which was vitriolic to Claire which looked at that website.

Goblin

That's a crass analogy and it doesn't work.

People with dsds aren't obliged to do anything.

Let's remember exactly who appropriated and fetishised dsd lives.

Ex brought this to the table and so the detail is hers. Many of us disagree with ^^ her points on this.

She shouldn't have been kicked off YouTube when she was, esp, given no one else has since repeated her claims, insights after being trans.

Claire in particular was speaking a lot about GC causes and speaking out about TRAs when Ex was a TRA several years ago. She was chucked off twitter for it.

*She shouldn't have been kicked off YouTube when she was, especially, given no one else who repeated her claims has been since.

That should say.

Vitriolic

@Cailleach1

Karen asked Genspect - a charity that is supposed to help kids with gender dysphoria - a very legitimate question about 2 of their associates, Blanchard and Bailey, being also listed as supporters of the Virtuous Ps. Virtuous Ps is a group of pedophiles who apparently only think about abusing children, but don't act on it.

Claire Graham is listed on Genspect's website as one of their "team". She has done several interviews together with Stella O'Malley on behalf of Genspect.

Karen put the question about Bailey and BLanchard's affiliation to Claire on Gettr. I don't know whether Claire inserted herself into an existing conversation Karen was having with other Genspect people, or whether Karen asked her direct from the off.

Karen asked Claire about the connection that has been created between Genspect and VP through B&B's dual affiliations. She also asked Claire what her position is on puberty blockers/ bottom surgeries (although described in a more direct way, which we are not allowed to say on MN). I believe this is because Genspect does advocate for bottom surgeries in certain cases of GD. I don't think these questions had anything to do with DSD or Claire being a DSD advocate. They were about Genspect to a team member of Genspect. I also don't think these are questions that are unreasonable. People on these pages have asked similar questions of various organisations having questionable connections, e.g., the NSPCC when they employed a fetishist, GGUK consulting with A Challenor, the Greens and Lib Dems with Challenor.

Claire's reply: to ask Karen what she's hiding and why she is obsessed with grown men raping teenage girls. Why is this the only thing you think about, Karen?

See what I mean. Straight out of the TRA DARVO/deflection handbook. And for someone who was professing on Boyce the other day that she doesn't like drama, a good way of creating one rather than answering a question.

And so it continued. Karen asking , the same question about the affiliation. Claire repeatedly haranguing Karen about being a pedophile. Karen did ask Claire about appropriateness of some of the stuff on the DSD Teens website. More of the same very nasty stuff from Claire about Karen being a pedophile. And some nice dog whistle stuff against a black woman (who is a teacher) being dumb and unable to read. It's all there in her last 3 videos.

I used to admire Claire Graham, but now I don't know what to think, but a good person? Not on that evidence.

Can anyone point me to a basic rundown of what this bun fight is about? I had been watching Exulansic before she was banned. I didn't watch a lot of the CAIS videos though, mostly because I am too thick to understand the heavy detail. I just want to be able to understand the controversy so I can decide what to think about it for myself.

NotMyGenderGoblin - "derailing a thread about her to go off on a DSD tangent that is irrelevant to this sub-forum"

Who made you the Thread Monitor who gets to decide what is or is not relevant?

The thread started in November 2021 and moved on from the original discussion to discussion of the fact Exulansic's Channel had been taken down, to general dismay and anger - did you object then?

There is no inconsistency in it moving on again: to discussing the possible motives and actors behind the channel being taken down, one possibility being related to her content on CAIS, and the attacks launched against Exulansic by "Internet Truther" - did you object then?

The discussion has moved seamlessly to Exulansic's more recent content on CAIS and other VSDs, with several members criticising her analysis and deploring her conduct - suddenly you call for "No Debate!" STFU women!

Where have we heard that before?

Recognise what you have become. Exulansic was a TRA and she has been honest that she used TRA tactics in the past. She has returned to her old ways and her GC fan base is following suit.

If you can't see it, the rest of us can.

I do not condone the bizarre attack on Exulansic by the man who calls himself "Intersex Truther" and I do not think anyone here would.

Neither do I condone Exulansic's misogynistic, utterly misguided attacks on Claire Graham, who she refers to in one video description as:

"Claire Graham describes herself as a woman with MRKH syndrome, which occurs when a female fetus does not develop a uterus and often has other structural problems outside the genital system."

How anyone could find this acceptable is beyond me.

First, the opening, "describes herself as a woman with MRKH syndrome". Rather than "is a woman with MRKH syndrome". What are we supposed to infer from this? That Claire is lying?

The rest is misogynistic TRA-talk on steroids! It goes well beyond describing women in general as "menstruators". She describes a specific, named woman in terms of her medical condition, reproductive organs and genitals.

Or is that OK because Claire is a woman with a VSD so "not really one of us" and therefore it cannot be misogyny? She has got XX chromosomes and a female phenotype - I thought that was supposed to be the Gold Standard?

If it is not misogyny then the alternative is intersexphobia.

Some PP are complaining, "Why are you criticising Exulansic? TRAs say horrible things too, why are you not criticising them?"

Um . . . because this thread is about Exulansic.

Are you new to Mumsnet? Were you under the impression that this is a place where GC women applaud or ignore TRAs who say horrible things?

The longer Exulansic continues to escalate, targeting, dehumanising and demonising people with VSDs and making defamatory statements about named individuals, the longer you can expect her to be called out here - so you can stop wasting your breath telling us to STFU.

@Janemain

Can anyone point me to a basic rundown of what this bun fight is about? I had been watching Exulansic before she was banned. I didn't watch a lot of the CAIS videos though, mostly because I am too thick to understand the heavy detail. I just want to be able to understand the controversy so I can decide what to think about it for myself.

I think (and I don't claim to understand it myself) this is the outline:

1. Some bloke with a beard interviewed Dalea, who presents as female, and said she has CAIS, which is a DSD. She gave lots of facts about it.
2. Turns out some of the facts were wrong.
3. Exulansic did one of her characteristic videos pulling her apart. She said people with CAIS are male, which caused a lot of upset to people with that diagnosis. Bloke with beard was very unhappy that brave Dalea was attacked for sharing her story.
4. A chap called Intersextruther posted a video criticising Exulansic, including an unflattering cartoon and a specially commissioned rap song. He included a bunch of people in the credits, who may or may not have been involved, who knows.
5. Exulansic hit total meltdown, accusing the cartoonist of being antisemitic and attacking some of the people in the credits.
6. Exulansic got banned from youtube. Intersextruther gloated. Unclear if he was involved in her being banned.
7. Mutual mudslinging.
8. Exulansic did an expose of Dalea, saying she doesn't have CAIS and was brought up as a man. No idea what's true there.
9. General distress in the DSD community.

10. More mudslinging. Lots of people on both sides posting increasingly inflammatory videos on a range of platforms, some of which have been linked to here, most of which I haven't watched. 11. Exulansic posts multiple videos attacking a woman who works for a DSD charity.

XX females only, and even then if they clearly are very man-like but are XX keep them out too.

Wtf? So butch lesbians in male prisons then?