Royal college of psychiatrists inclusive Q&A session does not go to plan.

[userlotsanumbers]

Twitter ratio, replying to a tweet with shades of Nottingham Council about it.

Questions were not welcome at a Q&A session.

45 Transphobic questions

Institutional capture?

I think I might identify as an 80 year old man and see if I can get some free meals on wheels and someone round to make me breakfast and clean the house each day😁

My personal suspicion is that a anti-trans group somehow infiltrated the invite and attendance data may demonstrate this.

How would they "infiltrate" it? People don't ever pretend to be something they're not, do they?

I disagree about the relevance of Hartland's sex. From some of the posts on here I got the impression that some people thought this masculine-presenting person was male. I think the fact that this is a female who is taking testosterone and has probably had a double mastectomy is very relevant. But it's the fact that it's someone who has medically transitioned rather than their sex which is important - I would be saying the same if it was someone who looked like a woman who was in fact male.

I don't know which sex Hartland is and don't think it's hugely relevant except for the fact that they very obviously believe that being a man gender-wise is so strongly linked to having a male body that they went to quite great lengths to embody this belief.

I wonder if one of the transphobic questions was 'if you are a man does that mean you have a male body?'

I disagree about the relevance of Hartland's sex. [...] But it's the fact that it's someone who has medically transitioned rather than their sex which is important [...] My view is that the RCP should not have selected a trans person to do this webinar.

I think we're in agreement 😁

It's identifying as a gender priest and expecting a congregation in what's supposed to be a medical discussion that's inappropriate. What form of gender priest doesn't really matter.

One of the Mermaids trustees is on the GLADD committee.

I wonder if one of the transphobic questions was 'if you are a man does that mean you have a male body?'

These are some of the questions from Venice Allan's twitter thread that I think this person might have found transphobic, because they are likely to have taken them as a personal attack.

What is gender and how can it be mismatched with a person's sex?

What is the moral case for inducing an addiction to plastic surgery in ppl who have noted co-morbid conditions often including obsessive thoughts and behaviours?

If being transgender is not an illness, why should they be offered radical surgeries and powerful, life changing drugs?

How can doctors justify prescribing high doses of testosterone to girls and women when much lower rates of naturally produced testosterone within the female body is a key indicator of harmful health conditions?

Why does anyone need cosmetic surgery to be happy with their healthy body?

Anything that makes them think about what they have done to their body and whether their medical treatment was the right thing to do is described as transphobic. Once you have done irreversible things to your body, it must be quite distressing to hear people saying that maybe this isn't the right treatment for someone in your position and perhaps we should be more cautious in future.

And, given this was a webinar for psychiatrists, shouldn’t the attendees be asking a lot of questions? Or is it the case that anything not 100% affirmatory is transphobic and literal conversion therapy?

That's a very good point about choice of presenter Old Crone. You would hope that psychiatrists would be able to see the big picture, be informed of the current climate, think ahead, and be mindful of the implications for both presenter and attendees.

My personal suspicion is that a anti-trans group somehow infiltrated the invite and attendance data may demonstrate this.

Next time Colin, can you add 'are you or have you ever been a Terf?' to our sign up form please?

I don't know which sex Hartland is
Look at the hand.

I think this is one of the problems with 'being transgender' being classed as part of the LGBT umbrella, so a bit like being gay, rather than it being classed as 'gender dysphoria' which is a mental health condition.

If you were going to have a webinar about a specific mental health condition, it would be presented by a medical professional who is an expert in treating patients with that condition, not one of the patients. This is what should happen here, with someone who is an expert on treating patients with gender dysphoria.

By demedicalising trans as 'not a mental health condition', they are treating it like a non-medical aspect of someone's life which might affect how they live, where it would be appropriate for someone who has experienced that to present the webinar. We can see from this example how inappropriate this is.

Exactly! It's an absolute mess. It might be too much to hope that this will give the medical community to pause to reflect following this, but I do.
All of this has had to depend on people finally being informed enough to be able to ask questions. (I was in a similar training a while ago where I did tentatively and that caused me great anxiety). I think this at least shows things are moving forward. What happens from here will require deep thought from those who haven't looked beyond the orthodoxy yet. Psychological experts are as guilty of blind spots, compliance, and defences as everyone else though...

Should say 'susceptible to', rather than 'guilty of' really.

Absolutely!

Screenshot directly from the Royal College of Psychiatrists EDI training yesterday.

One of the slides...and look what they are pushing for...😡

Why does every female ward need a TW in? Or are they as bad at clear grammar and punctuation as they are at clear definitions?

On a serious note, have they considered why being around females (not "women", I note) decreases risk of violence? Can they confirm that sex is a factor in this risk? It seems that's what they imply.

Very much so. But we're not allowed to think about that.

Frightening that people like this are influencing gullible and vulnerable young people. But the response from actual professionals is encouraging.

I can’t articulate what utter bollocks this is.

There are screenshots? Oooh, I hope we get to see more of them.

I can’t articulate what utter bollocks this is.

I don't know, that wasn't bad.

Or maybe your user name would work?

Thanks, Corgi - that thread is golden!

Or is it the case that anything not 100% affirmatory is transphobic and literal conversion therapy?

Pretty much this, I think

I'm so pleased that people in the profession are asking questions.

At a similar session a year or so ago at my work, similar set up, on line training, ask questions in the chat - I asked a few fairly gentle questions. Then realised that literally no one else had asked any - from a group of over a hundred attendees, where there's usually lively debate and questioning. I felt a bit exposed!
And the answers I got were ridiculous.

For example, I asked if there might be a benefit in waiting lists, as there had been anecdotal reports of people detransitioning during lockdown (when away from peers). I was told there was no such concept of detransitioning or transitioning as gender is a fluid concept. (so why/when would you know if someone needs surgery?)

There was a trans-identified female speaking in that session, she was pre-surgery and pre-hormones I think, on waiting list for gender clinic. the clinician spoke enthusiastically about her nearly getting to the top of the waiting list. I sometimes think of her and wonder.