So disgusted tonight

[Mollyollydolly]

Owen Jones and Pink News tweeted about the two Helens, Joyce and Staniland and their YouTube chat .. Jones taking what they said completely out of context it's resulted in some of the most vile abuse aimed at Helen Joyce in particular on twitter tonight. So many death threats.

I wish there was something we could do, it's so utterly vile, it's time they were held to account for their lies. It's really upsetting.

Owen Jones isn't fit to lace Helen's shoes, I cant believe The Guardian still employ him. I've seen threats to murder, throw napalm in their faces from Joss Prior and many many more. It's disgusting and all down to Owen.

How can this stand up to any level of journalistic ethics or integrity.

It's time we did something, some kind of collective action.

Oh how closely we are being Monitored, again!

Don't make 'em look bad, Pike!

Questionable Pole Exercise?

I think Alex Sharpe was (is?) a door tenant at GCC, whatever that means. So not directly part of the chambers but was referenced in evidence as influential by the trans working group's members.

How this situation developed:
Video live streamed on Wednesday 25 May 2022.

Thousands of people view it at the time and in the following week. There are no public reactions to it other than approval of the discussion.

Thursday 2 June 2022 at 5.31 pm: on Twitter, Person A tweets "Reasonable crowd strikes again" and includes a very short transcript from the video.

Thursday 2 June 2022 at 7.38 pm: on Twitter, Person B tweets a link to an edited clip of just over one minute from the hour long video:

"My blood is boiling.
Soooo fucking much!
The absolute fucking arrogance, of these two braindead dickheads, spelling out the fascistic solution to trans people exhibiting natural human diversity, is sick, twisted, perverted, and beyond callous and evil!
I don't have the words..."

Thursday 2 June 2022 at 7.48 pm: on Twitter, [10 minutes after Person B's tweet] Person C tweets a link to the edited clip:

"Helen Joyce blatantly saying her aim is to stop people transitioning as 'every one is a difficulty'."

Thursday 2 June 2022 at 10.32 pm: on Twitter, Person A tweets again with a link to the whole video with his own version of transcript:

"“We have to limit the harm [which requires] keeping down the number of people who transition. Every one of these people is a person who has been damaged. The fewer of these people there are, the better” (Helen Joyce 25/5/22)."

Friday 3 June at 3.32 pm: on Twitter, Person A tweets again with a link to the whole video:

"The mask is well and truly off at 4.55 - 5.58 mins.
But also at 1:04:55 mins: "A lot of religions have child sacrifice and here we have one (the trans movement).""

Thereafter, from 3 June 2022 someone from Stonewall comments, as does someone who writes for the Guardian, and Pink News writes a web page.

So, one person kicked it off [Person A] another amplifies it, but with an edited clip of 1 minute 26 seconds that presents a distortion from an hour long chat [Person B], followed by another who amplifies that distortion [Person C].

Yes, there may be evidence for it across time and cultures all over the world. But did they subject them to surgery to try to "fix" them? We are proposing we should not be trying to surgically correct someone's "identity".

We now fix many things with surgery that want available 1000 years ago. It’s a spectrum of identity with a corresponding spectrum of dysphoria.

Explain what 'cross sex identity' means with absolutely no reference at all to stereotypes.

A deep conviction that one should be the opposite physical sex. Functioning better psychologically, socially, occupationally and sexually when medical and/ or surgical steps are taken to alter secondary and sometimes primary sex characteristics to resemble as closely as possible that sex.

🤣

"Who do they think they are kidding..."

We should only fix with surgery where we have a known problem and we know the surgery will help

Its historically very rare for someone to have gender dismorphia long lasting and having detrimental impact on someone's life

That is very different to a child struggling with natural changes and a gender restrictive society

it's very different to gender none conforming style senses and personality and a misogynistic outlook to life

but at the moment it's all bundled together and needs teasing out - not a sweeping over simplistic mantra

We now fix many things with surgery that want available 1000 years ago.

Right, but they're fixing physical problems, not modifying healthy bodies.

I can't immediately think of any other examples of claimed surgical "fixes" for non-physical problems. If you can, please go ahead.

Best I can do is cosmetic stuff like breast implants and nose jobs, which might make some people feel better about themselves. Don't think we should be promoting that in schools though, or letting children do it.

A deep conviction that one should be the opposite physical sex.

Okay, yes, men can have that. But women don't have a deep conviction that they "should be female", any more than men have a deep conviction that they "should be male".

A deep conviction that one should be female is a uniquely male condition, and not something that such men have in common with women.

We're not denying that some men can feel like that - lots clearly do. We're just pointing out that it's got nothing to do with actual women, any more than people feeling like they're wolves has anything to do with actual wolves.

If it's not a condition that can be ascertained via a diagnosis by a relevant medical practitioner and provable by objective medical tests or by a psychiatric practitioner after relevant psychiatric assessment, why is healthcare necessary? The NHS can't give treatment in the absence of any professional diagnosis. Surely, here, you are talking about cosmetic procedures to fulfill the subjective desires of that "deep conviction"?

It's so difficult to discuss concepts we cannot define such as gender identity. I know I don't have one if it is supposed to be an abstract feeling of being 'feminine'. So whose definitions should the conversations use?

And how does gender dysphoria differ from body dysmorphia? Can we be certain that gender dysphoria is always caused by transgender identity? Could it sometimes be a misdiagnosis of something that is trauma based, say?

As I wrote, it's hard for me to comprehend "a deep conviction that one should be the opposite physical sex".

I am not at all certain that the me which I would interpret as the innermost part of my sense of self even has a sex. I am just a person who happens to be told, by my body, and by the wider world (sometimes in unpleasant terms) that I am a female person.

I am certain that there are individuals for whom medical and/or surgical steps bring relief from gender dysphoria.

But I am unaware of general scientific evidence that this would be helpful, in general, and I am concerned about the extremely large and rapid increases in teens who wish to transition, especially as in the past most in that group were boys while now many more girls present themselves in that group than never in the past.

The often used comparison to being left-handed doesn't really work, because the percentage increases in a decade are truly enormous, in thousands of percentages, while the group of those who said that they are left-handed rose from 4 to 12 %, roughly, over about seven decades when the stigma attached to it was removed.

The way I understood what Helen Joyce was saying has to do with these questions, i.e., how do we make certain that we correctly diagnose those children who indeed are transgender, and how do we find the best modalities for their care over the long run?

If we rely on the child's self-diagnosis alone, how many people get the wrong medical treatment and what are the costs of that wrong medical treatment in the long run?

It also matters to ask what the consequences would be for doing it wrong in the other direction, of course. We really need a much better way of diagnosing gender dysphoria and of properly treating all co-morbidities and of assessing the child's overall social etc. situation.

No, there are some cultures where there are categories that allow some people who are of a certain sex to behave according to some, but generally not all, the social conventions of the other sex.

In every case these are cultures where there are some or many fairly strict behavioral taboos about cross sex behaviour. Often homosexuality is one of them - the logic of the society being that men can't have sex with men, so if that is going on at least some of the participants aren't seen as men in the normal way, and can't play all the social roles of men or have the kinds of social status of men. It can also apply to men doing work normally given to women. Though they also normally have a lot more freedom, particularly sexually, than women.

There is only one society with such a role for women to live as men, where there happens to sometimes be a lack of males to lead. In that case, rather than having more freedoms, they have fewer than biological men, in particular they can't marry and have children.

These aren't roles people take on due to some kind of innate gender identity. They are ways a society may deal with certain ideas about proper male and female behaviour. They aren't always roles entered into willingly by the individuals either. Sometimes it is the only way for a person to get out of a sexual role that is unwanted, or it may be required by the comminity in order to make of for a sex imbalance.

This has nothing to do with gender identity theory in the west.

That word is being redefined quite seperatly to all of this, I'm afraid.

but they're fixing physical problems, not modifying healthy bodies.

FFS. How many times does this need to be said?

And around and around we go.

It is the same as lobotomies when people are getting their bodies cut up and medicalised in the attempt to create some sort of resemblance to the other sex. And it doesn't solve their problem because they remain the sex they wished to escape. Only now they are damaged, and may no longer be able to function as their sex.

In terms of being human the "physical" is the human body, is it not? [The human body is a mix of biology, organic chemistry and physical science.] So, what is being "fixed"? A human body is a human body that is naturally a female or a male body that no human ever has a choice about.

So yes, some humans are demanding that their healthy bodies be modified. A healthy body is a body that is not a threat to the wellbeing or life of that body.

This has been a busy thread and I haven't read everything since I posted near the start, but I did some some posts about BIID. Posters interested in that might want to read this fascinating piece from 2000

www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2000/12/a-new-way-to-be-mad/304671/

A deep conviction that one should be the opposite physical sex. Functioning better psychologically, socially, occupationally and sexually

Field, can you explain how, for instance, women are psychologically different to men? And socially? And occupationally and sexually? In the context of why a man would want to inhabit those roles? And how he could?

Not a trick question. You obviously think that there are differences which are sufficiently unalike and unobtainable, that the only way to acquire them is to emulate the opposite sex.

For me, this desire is underpinned by sexism, and accommodating the desire promotes the sexism. Cements it in.

And, also to me, this is why feminists are so on it. Because their whole raison d'etre is to eliminate sexism. So they spot it at 50 paces.

i'd be interested in your answers.

Uh oh. LOJ tries to calm the baying mob he helped create, and now the TRAS are displeased with him.

Lots more here:

"Anyone not blocked by OJ should go and take a look at his feed.

Its never enough Owen."

twitter.com/Liesl_lseil/status/1533936419281969158?t=8aIVjZ4wP7ssA13HwKVjYA&s=19

twitter.com/Liesl_lseil/status/1533937502238695424?t=DrekSGQwZpzEPnKh4Y_cmg&s=19

He'll be 'repenting motherfucker' by lunchtime.

Wow! I guess as Owen agrees with us on the meaning of genocide that he is Mumsnet-adjacent? That's how it works, right?

Gawd. Most people won't want to align themselves with zealots who call this sort of
discussion an incitement to genocide!

Although I'm mildly surprised that after all this time he still isn't au faux with how TRAs operate.

At some point he's got to be glancing afresh at the kind of people who are still left on that 'right side of history.'

Heads up as these threads may have attracted a lot of reporting yesterday Mumsnet data breach www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/4564197-mumsnet-data-breach-1

Bloody hell,that's awful!