Helen Joyce/Helen Staniland "Trans Elimination" video

[momentsinthewind]

I've just seen a video on YouTube with HJ and HS and HJ is saying that we need to return to a sane world and everyone who has transitioned is damaged and will need special accommodation (detransition treatment?) in the future.

I'm GC and have many concerns about safe spaces and sport etc, but this just seems to be going too far.

I found it quite upsetting if I'm honest.

I agree some of the subtlety is getting lost.

I agree that the social contagion type of impact we seem to be seeing among young women and girls particularly is something that needs to be dealt with before we have a large number go through medication and surgery.

Similarly, dealing with the type of man who would use the relaxation of any rules and laws to accommodate transsexual people to predate on women needs to be dealt with.

I agree with them in all that, but I agree with you that among this some of those on the GC "side" are losing sight of the fact that for some people they have a genuine and strong gender dysphoria that will be helped by transition and treatment, and the issue is other using their challenges to further a damaging agenda.

We have to separate this out and not deal in broad brushstrokes.

You might like to join this thread

www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/4562095-so-disgusted-tonight

And by the way, have you watched the full version, or just the edited version?

Thanks, I'll have a look at that

I don't know about everyone being damaged because the trans umbrella is made up of distinct groups of people who really have little in common other than the label.

Toddlers who show a liking for a type of toy or clothing and are pronounced trans by parents have nothing in common with men who transition age 50 (as much as the activists would like to say they do).

Teen girls and young women I would say are again distinct from the above two groups in their reasons for identification.

There's an argument to be made that 50 year old men can do as they want as long as it infringes on nobody else (which regrettably it currently is!).

However I don't think a sane world should endorse trans toddlers or cheer on the amount of radical mastectomies young girls and women are having because that is going to lead to a lot of sadness and regret some of which we are seeing increasingly now.

Turning lots of healthy individuals into life long medical patients because of a belief is a societal problem because there's no guarantee that care pathway will always exist or remain free and it comes with a lot of complications as standard.

I don't know about everyone being damaged because the trans umbrella is made up of distinct groups of people who really have little in common other than the label.

I agree. They were clearly talking about people who had transitioned as children and significantly altered their bodies. It's transactivists who have confused the issue here.

I think it is plain that the clip on twitter was cut where it was to remove the context.

Medical transitioning does damage bodies. I ask any poster to show us proof that medical transitioning doesn’t damage bodies. Even Dr Cass states social transitioning is not ‘nuetral’ and it can be surmised that it may also be ‘damaging’ to children and teens.

And is it a sane society that allows these treatments that are unevidenced to be used for something that is certainly not a rare incident but is a rapidly growing issue amongst young females in particular, who have not been adequately researched.

At adult level, is it sane to have the IOC decide that now any male who identifies as a woman can compete as a female, even without any treatment if the sporting body decides that is fine by them? How is that not an issue for ‘sane society’ to deal with.

Yes, blunt language was used.

If you listen to the full section where it is discussed, including the bit about the two Dutch specialists on Stella O’Malley’s podcast, you can see the points she was making.

I've just seen this too, it was indeed "chilling" to watch.

I think it is plain that the clip on twitter was cut where it was to remove the context.

Oh.

So in fact had to be carefully doctored to make it look like it said something questionable, instead of in fact, being something that was questionable. So the critical understanding was there that it didn't in fact say this unless it was carefully edited to make it say it.

I feel so sorry for this political extremist lobby. They're forced to make their own screenshots and doctor stuff constantly to evidence their narrative. It's like if they didn't create it all themselves it wouldn't exist.

I have now seen the whole thing and yes, it is blunt, it lacks a lot of the usual sugar coating applied to anything trans. It is unapologetically matter if fact about the realities of a growing trans cohort that is being fuelled by all sorts of social influences, is not solely individuals with ago or dysphoria, is, in part, a youth trend.

From young people starting a medicines transition with scandalously little actual information, see the Weberleys, to women being raped by inmates in prison, there is a huge problem and lots of unacceptable costs to 'being trans' these days.

A sane society would halt all unproven medical interventions, would insist on fully informed treatment based in real science. Would abhor the idea of locking women into a cell with a male bodied person. Would look askance at men in women's sports, taking business awards for women, demanding to be treated as women.

We are measurably insane as a society. Saying that what either Helen said was tantamount to genocide is ludicrous, spreading that lie to discredit them and those demanding that the damage being done is stopped should be a criminal offence. I hope that the next tranche of those detransitioning name LOJ et Al as part of the unecessary web of deceit that got them into a position where they irrevocably changed their bodies whilst having been told that hormone intervention is wholly reversible.

That's because it does not exist. If your "arguments" (sic) consisted entirely of lies, distortion, obfuscation and made up bullshit wouldn't you be a fan of "No debate?"

Yes Samphire. That pretty much much sums it up.

She is saying there should be a minimization of medical transitioning for children until research comes through to support it, and particularly for young females.

She is saying that any medical treatment is damaging to the body.

She is saying that there are unrealistic accommodations being demanded of society.

To call it ‘chilling’ is a bad faith take. To draw your conclusions from a partial transcript or video clip and call it abhorrent is an indication you are not engaging with the substance of what she is saying and happily joining in tone policing.

She is blunt.

Those posters wishing to point their fingers to shame her, address the points. Specifically and one by one.

All the rest is virtue signaling distraction.

And to all those tone policing, yes… do go onto trans boards and trans tweeters and police their tone too!!

it is only fair and equal treatment after all.

Blunt and correct IMV.

Joyce is right. There will be social , economic and medical repercussions and costs associated with the transition of children. To pretend there will not be would be irresponsible and almost unhinged. The fact that some people want us to remain silent about all this is what I find 'chilling'.

Absolutely!
We are telling children that if they don't get their way they’ll be suicidal. That if their parents won’t give in to their desire to take untested drugs and have their bodies surgically altered they are BAD parents and the children should DISOWN them - again, bullying / blackmailing tactics.
Its appalling

Here's the full conversation: "Wine with Women ep. 4: Helen Joyce" m.youtube.com/watch?v=8_u1MQFjxvI

i watched a week or so ago and remember thinking they're not sugar coating anything. tough to hear some parts, but we need to hear.

I see others have pointed out to you that the excerpt you've posted has been edited to make it look as if Helen is saying something she didn't. She was talking specifically about the physical and mental damage done to young people: the mastectomies, the drugs that leave young people with the bones of 80s year olds. Here's the evidence:
grahamlinehan.substack.com/p/new-swedish-documentary-exposes-the?s=r

Most people sail through their teens, 20s and 30s in good physical health, making relatively low demands on the system. But now we have a cohort of hundreds, maybe thousands (do we know how many young people the Webberley's prescribed for?) of young people who will have incurred damage to their bodies and minds and will require lifelong treatment. The NHS, social services, mental health services, housing services — they will all need to create special provision for this completely new phenomenon.

There seems to be wholesale denial being sold here.

People are so concerned about the words used they ignore the truth of it.

Medical drug treatment causes side effects which is damage?

yes or no?

Is trans a health issue that requires medical drug treatment ? Has this been properly researched in light of current cohort of young transitioners?

yes or no?

(hint read Dr Cass’s interim report)

Have trans groups demanded male priority over females in some instances where sex matters?

yes or no?

Is this something a ‘sane society’ should countenance immediately or have many, many debates and studies before making such decisions?

yes or no?

Cut the crap and answer questions.

No more chilling, surely, than what we're doing to children and young people? Treatment that can lead to someone in their 20s and 30s having spinal fractures as their bones disintegrate? People in the prime of their life having to use a walking frame because of the drugs they fought for?

I watched the whole video the day it came out and the hot take couldn't be further from my understanding of what the Helens were saying. I can only think people saying these things either can't have watched the whole thing, or have an axe to grind.

Personally I like that Helen J has become less inclined to pussy foot around or sugar coat her words. She is right. I have a chronic pain condition; if someone said the goal is to have fewer people with chronic pain, i wouldn't jump to the frankly ludicrous conclusion that she wants to erase/eradicate me. I would conclude that she understands that chronic pain is awful, and we should seek to cure people who suffer it. It's not rocket science, but if you (general you) want to make the least charitiable and most bad faith reading, I imagine it's quite easy.

I would like to see Helen Joyce in conversation with a health economist who can lay out the sort of assessment that NICE makes when approving a treatment intervention for NHS England and Wales or the Scottish Medicines Consortium (SMC) for NHS Scotland.

I've no idea what the standard economic case would look like for evaluating the lifetime costs v. the QALY (the gains grounded in health related quality of life, known as quality adjusted life years) and the flip side of that, the detriments that accrue. (I don't think that they always do this because it must depend on what the proposed treatment is as to whether it reduces or increases the number of Disability Adjusted Life Years aka DALY.)

Those health agencies do it all the time. It must be possible to explore how many years of health are gained or lost through various levels of medical, surgical, non-pharmaceutical, and other interventions. For example, the gain in overall quality of life from being relieved of (some degree of) gender dysphoria (where present) and the loss of health-related quality of life associated with (say) early onset osteoporosis, or acquiring long-term bladder problems.

As a mom of teens, I've seen too many young women and young men who have been damaged because they think hormones, surgeries and certain clothing will make them happy, help them make friends, help them feel less awkward or fix their pain. It's a lie and I appreciate these feminists speaking the unvarnished truth. There will be a lot of unhappy adults in 10-20 years who have lost sexual functions and reproductive capabilities. Families have also been harmed because of this...I read PITTstack religiously and the stories from parents is really gut wrenching. If people in power had spoken so clearly like Joyce and Staniland, maybe we wouldn't be here.

I wonder if there's enough data for this yet,