Annaliese Dodds: "sex and gender are different"

[CheshireSplat]

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2023/jul/24/labour-vows-to-modernise-simplify-and-reform-gender-recognition-act

Me neither.

RebelliousCow· Today 19:10
But it is entirely valid, and necessary even, to challenge the concept that. 'being trans' is just something that people are - by nature. They aren't! There is no such thing as being born in the wrong body, and 'Gender' is a social construction. Yes, some people suffer from dysphoria- but this is by definition a mental health issue.

On another thread, someone had posted a podcast from Gender a Wider lense, by someone who had done extensive research on Fa’afafine in Samoa, and similar men within another tribal groups. They know they are male but are treated as a third sex and look more like women. They are more likely to have an occupation women have. They are gay and are attracted to masculine men.

These were boys who emerged as far more feminine than boys around them, and it seems clear they were born that way. They weren’t born in the wrong body though and they never think they were.

The difference is that in our society there must have been less acceptance to just let boys like this be as they wanted.

It is a shame that just as being gay has become more accepted in our society, boys are being brainwashed into thinking they must be trans instead.

The other difference is that these man have nothing in common with the late onset AGPs, or the young teen ROGD girls in our society.

It's not just Crispin Blunt. Here's Alicia Kearns arguing it on Conservative Home.

https://conservativehome.com/2021/12/07/alicia-kearns-lets-interrogate-the-attacks-on-the-conversion-therapy-ban/

There's that meme isn't there? Ancient now. But in essence:

Far right: You are a biological man, and must change your personality and behaviours to fit within our stereotype of man.

TRAs/far left: your personality and behaviours (and other things including sex interests) mean you have left our stereotype of biological man, and you should change your body and sex to fit our stereotype of woman.

Women fed up with this shit: You are a biological man who is perfect the way you are, with a body and personality that is fine. Put the stereotypes in the bin and just be the man you are.

Reverse that for women. Except for women, add a whole lot more pressures to identify out of the powerless service human group and into the group that gets listened to/has rights/isn't perved on.

Re what Alicia Kearns said here:
Representatives of organisations such as the Royal College of Psychiatrists, the British Psychological Society, the Albany Trust, Royal College of General Practitioners, Association for Christian Counsellors and many more stand behind a ban.

That is not surprising in regard to the Royal College of Psychiatrists considering that,

The Royal College of Psychiatrists is delighted to announce that it has today officially been awarded a Stonewall Gold Award, having been ranked the 90th top employer in the UK for LGBTQ+ inclusivity.

.Last year, the College won a Stonewall Silver Award, having been ranked the 134th top employer for LGBTQ+ inclusivity.

^This year, its ranking has improved as a result of taking further measures to ensure that it promotes inclusivity for staff and members who are LGBTQ+.
Participants in the Stonewall scheme are not expected to take every measure on the charity’s list, but we completed 80% of the measures which were consistent with our values and ways of working, and were proud to be awarded gold status.
Other organisations in the top 100 include NHS England, Health Education England^,
https://www.rcpsych.ac.uk/news-and-features/latest-news/detail/2023/02/16/stonewall-gold-award-recognises-college-as-an-lgbtq-inclusive-employer

and The British Psychological Society’s p harmful affirmation approach (2020),

TransgenderTrend
Psychologists call for a review of @BPSOfficial guidelines promoting the affirmation approach. The BPS responds by saying they have consulted with Stonewall & the LGBT Foundation. Serious questions need to be asked about institutional policy capture. https://thepsychologist.bps.org.uk/volume-33/october-2020/freedom-expression-around-diversity-guidelines
2:02 pm · 18 Sep 2020

I believe the evidence tells us that affirmation actually is conversion therapy. So ban that. The only way to truly ban conversion therapy is to separate sex and gender entirely and make it an offence to muddle the two. Then any space which wants to swgregate by gender will need to justify that and if they're not providing 100 plus spaces, they'll need to have a very good account of why with 100 plus genders they are providing only 2 segregated spaces.

It's a total box of frogs.

The whole thing is one large trojan horse to try and enforce affirmation only/tie everyone's hands from any other action while galloping kids through transitions. With a 'sucks to be you' approach to detransitioners. Hugely moral and responsible.

It's riding on the idea of historical gay conversion therapy which is terribly, terribly useful to exploit. (No evidence yet produced at any stage of this bill that this is an issue now.)

This is the same lobby that insists that to be exclusively same sex attracted is sexually racist, and that women should 'learn to overcome their genital prejudices' and 'learn to cope' with sex with men who have TQ+ identities. And not expect to enjoy sex or even desire it, but see it as some social duty to provide their bodies in the name of social righteousness or something, and refusal or arguing back (you can find the threads here and see activists doing it) is to punish, exclude, scold, threaten, and do their best to force homosexuals to get in line and be in fact bisexual. The lobby has of course ended exclusively homosexual groups and organisations by vigorously bullying and attacking any that exist. (Recent example in London.) And this is apparently NOT conversion therapy. 😜

Again you realise that no words here actually mean what you thought they meant, have been gutted of all meaning, and in essence if it benefits the TQ+ political agenda it is Good and Righteous, and if it benefits anyone but TQ+ people or gets in the way of the political agenda, it is Bad. (And bigot and isms and obics and extreme alt-right and Nazi and Other Things Too.)

And yes, if discouraging transition is conversion, then encouraging it is also conversion. But this is not a lobby that deals much in logic, sense, rationality or reality.

Stella O'Malley presents a good overview of the conversion therapy bill and what it means for therapists at the Genspect conference:

Also, David Bell talks about this with Liberal voice for women- I'll post that separately.

This is a very long and fascinating presentation from David Bell, with a thorough Q&A. It's over 2 hour long, but he discusses conversion therapy at approx 1hr 47 if none just wants to hear that bit:

David Bell mentions a personal statement he has made on the bill. I can't find that anywhere, so if anyone has access to share that I'd really appreciate it!

Some letters published in the Guardian in response to this and RMW's article. In fact a whole bundle. Couldn't find room for one from someone who was GC, perhaps they didn't receive any. I have a little sympathy for the two old style tw (although irritated by their entitlement). They, perhaps, should look at the likes of RMW, Stonewall and the rest of the tras.

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2023/jul/27/the-labour-party-is-walking-a-fine-line-on-trans-rights

Not once in the article or response does it mention the need to consult with women about their spaces. Just a male focused entitlement to 'consult trans people'. Nothing about us without us only seems to apply to men. Which is proof positive of the fact that men, all men, should get out and stay out of women's spaces. I have some sympathy for the old trans people but labour should never have made a law which allows a legal pretence. That was the point when they let them down. A man is always a man and it's not my problem to keep him safe.

Trash arguments.

Something isn't an attack on religious liberty because some religious people support the ban?

Something is supposedly "discredited" as therapy, so consenting adults shouldn't be able to try it in a religious context?

Comparing to FGM?

I think handling poisonous snakes as a religious practice is "discredited" when these crazies get bitten by the snakes, but I will still stand for the right of consenting adults to engage in such lunacy.

Doesn't matter if it "works" or not. It's not for the government to be passing judgement that they don't think your religion is "scientifically valid" enough to deserve protection.