What's going on with Genspect?

[MalagaNights]

I've seen Stella O'Malley tweet about being unfairly attacked.
I've seen a weird exchange from James Lindsay about feminists trying to take down Genspect.

But I can't work out what's happened or who is fighting with who.

Any ideas?

Thank you, very useful context.

I agree that Genspect seems like it needs to either choose one angle, or split into two groups.

But I wonder if it’s more whatWE think Genspect should do, rather than what they’re actually trying to do.

They are NOT a lobbying or activist organisation although I think a lot of people think they should be. Lord knows we need an activist organisation in this field.

Genspect is an organisation primarily about responsible balanced therapeutic care for children and young people, and their parents and families. And that might mean that they need to face head on, stuff that those of us watching from the sidelines have the luxury of not having to deal with.

They can’t be both activists and therapists.

I’ve found listening to the Gender: a wider lens podcasts to be hugely informative and thought provoking. And I’ve also realised that they are quite deliberately trying not to be too immured in a specific political position. There was one epi where they talked about feminists and feminism as if they were nothing to do with them. As a “they” not a “we”.

Im conflicted about the presence of an AGP man at their conference. But if you’re a therapist maybe you need to know who such people are and how to treat them. And therapy also tries to start where the patient is and work from there to
open up other possible perspectives.

Dr Suzanne Vierling tweeted re what happened at Genspect & about the Ray Blanchard tweet mentioned in an earlier post and I found it an interesting thread. Lack of impulse control, exhibitionism and clustering of these fetishes/paraphilias in men with AGP is discussed.

https://twitter.com/suzannevierling/status/1724133712013795807

Tweet text:
@suzannevierling
What is the role of a psychologist, psychotherapist, mental health professional? Our job when working with a population suffering from a mental health condition is to organize a treatment protocol purposed to ameliorate negative symptoms and assist the client in adapting to our societal norms and expectations.

For example, when a young person is diagnosed with schizophrenia, he or she is expected to adapt to a culture that values predictable behavior and linear thinking. A psychologist can then be part of a team that assists the client not only in feeling better and functioning independently, but in adapting as best as possible to his or her environment. Society does not adapt nor is expected to adapt to the condition.

In no way shape or form should the mental health profession proceed with supporting protocols that places 50% of the population in harms way, as opposed to helping individuals adapt to societal norms - as is what is done for all mental health conditions. This is criminal.

Last edited
6:34 pm · 13 Nov 2023 ·20.4K Views

I'm very tempted to go to the next one with just a 'safeguarding' head on. Like a mystery shopper [which I did for many years].

I hope no-one minds me posting a few more interesting tweets that I’ve found discussing Genspect.

Amy Sousa
https://twitter.com/KnownHeretic/status/1724107025104437683

Tweet text:
@ KnownHeretic
Warning: EMPATHY TRAP
^^
It is not in women's interest to make accommodations for men with transvestic fetishism. Their public paraphilia is directly harmful to women/children.
^^
Some men are tormented by fetishistic addictions, but it is a dangerous empathy trap to put men's psychological state above women's physical safeguarding. Do not be drawn into empathy traps that attempt to place men's sexual desires over the health of the culture at large. Reserve your empathy for the men and women who do not consent to being unwilling participants in men's sexual gratification. Boundaries are more important than some men's sexual frustration. #EmpathyTrap
4:48 pm · 13 Nov 2023 ·93.2K Views

Genevieve Gluck - this tweet includes screenshots of an old transvestite magazine called Empathy. The Letters to the Editor page is an eye-opener.

https://twitter.com/WomenReadWomen/status/1724287583537312195

Tweet text:
@ WomenReadWomen
These men and the sexologists who advocate for them have been emotionally manipulating women for decades. And before "true trans" there was "true transvestite."
4:46 am · 14 Nov 2023 ·1,595 Views

Last copied-over post from Twitter on the Genspect issue for now.

Lorelei
https://twitter.com/hatpinwoman/status/1724089337736773791

Tweet text:
@ hatpinwoman
It’s critical to understand that men with transvestic fetishism do not share an identity, or a new form of innate sexual orientation, or some hitherto overlooked characteristic in need of protection.
^^
They aren’t secretly women, and they aren’t a vulnerable group of men.
^^
What they have in common is a paraphilia and their paraphilia stands to increase, not diminish, their risk to others.
^^
Including children.
^^
“Transvestic fetishism may be associated with increased risks for sexual acting out that could injure the individual and victimize others.
^^
Among subjects who accidentally died when engaged in autoerotic asphyxia, a high- risk paraphilic behavior based on self-induced cerebral anoxia by hanging or suffocation during masturbation, transvestic fetishism was common (Blanchard & Hucker, 1991).
^^
Co-occurrence of non-paraphilic hypersexuality, including extensive masturbation and promiscuity, and transvestic fetishism has been identified in clinical outpatient populations (Black, Kehrberg, Flumerfeldt, & Schlosser, 1997; Kafka & Hennen, 1999, 2002).
^^
Finally, a seminal investigation of 561 male subjects voluntarily seeking help for paraphilic behavior revealed that many had additional DSM-II/III paraphilias in addition to the presenting diagnosis (Abel, Becker, Cunningham-Rathner, Mittelman, & Rouleau, 1988).
^^
Up to 20% of individuals with transvestic fetishism also had been involved in the sexual molestation of children, and 36% had committed exhibitionistic acts (see also Langevin, Checkley, & Pugh, 1987)”
^^
Quote from “Transvestic Fetishism in the General Population: Prevalence and Correlates” by Kenneth J. Zucker and Niklas Langstrom

3:38 pm · 13 Nov 2023 ·57.5K Views

Lorelei and Dr Louise Moody did a good space on this on Twitter/X the other day.

therapy also tries to start where the patient is and work from there to open up other possible perspectives.

Which is why we no longer offer family therapy to parents and children when (one of) those parents (has) been sexually abusing their children.

I am old enough to remember when therapists thought that was a good idea.

No, not personal, but I still remember a very serious educational-type TV documentary showing that therapy in (I think) the late 1970s or early 1980s. The therapy started from where the abuser was, and the therapist told the victim to take her share of the responsibility for the abuse. Even then I was enraged on her behalf!

This thread has some amazing insights in it. Forgive me as I don't have the PPs' names to hand but I wanted to pick up on a few gems and add my own thoughts, from my perspective as a parent (of an autistic gender-questioning child) who is also interested in protecting women's rights:

1. I welcome the fact that Genspect cast their net wide and bring in voices from the other point of view (in this case, an acronym person). Although we have information already, the climate changes in relation to the acronym, particularly so for boys who are being pulled towards seeing themselves as female through anime, avatars and similar. Maintaining up to date info and dialogue through current as well as historical known inputs is important.
2. This should only ever be done with adequate safeguarding regarding how that input is considered and challenged. They let their guard down here massively on this, as demonstrated by their promotional tweet. If they can't recognise that his choice of dress style was incongruous and performative, what other transgressions have they failed to recognise and potentially pull in to their framework? How much influence has already crept in to their allegiances and ways of working?
3. The narcissm pathway was very interesting from this perspective. It also describes ego-led behaviours in many/most corporate organisations. It's no accident that many CEOs are of a personality type that behaves in a similar way and the work politics can be pretty brutal. The added layer here is the danger of escalations that are linked to a fetish which feeds off lack of consent for the thrill. Hence the safeguarding fail right from the start.
4. Calling out what's happening in autism circles in relation to narcissm creeping in resonates hugely with me (and linking it back to the current toilet issue is very astute). I have stepped away from the parent groups because attendees are being indoctrinated to believe that any strategies to help your child navigate the world are "ableist" and that the world should shift to accommodate autistic people. I totally disagree. My daughter is fab and wonderful in so many ways but this doesn't mean the world should accept her "as she is". There should be reasonable adjustments yes, but ultimately the autistic person needs to learn skills and strategies to navigate the world as it is. Thankfully the school and CAMHS agree on this, so stepping away from the unhelpful influence is an easy choice to make on this one.
5. If Genspect wants to include voices from attendees such as this person, reasonable adjustments may be possible (e.g. perhaps he could attend in something that wasn't so clearly performative) but safeguarding should come first. If that balance of risk (his fetish performance in the conference and his ideas infiltrating the framework without proper scrutiny) and benefit (interactive active discussion on his input to help further understanding) can't be achieved then so be it. Ideally I would hope that they could find a balance to have him there but if not, I would expect them to err on the side of caution. Actively promoting him and his book displays massive red flags that they have been captured and are oblivious to the fire with which they are playing - as stated above by a PP.
6. The social contract is an interesting one. When we wear clothes, we make a statement. No matter what someone's sex, wearing something deliberately incongruous (e.g. jeans at a wedding) breaks the social contract in some way. The extent to which this causes upset to others depends on weighing up lots of different factors. Personally, I would be OK with the attendee being there in a different dress that wasn't so clearly performative. But if the majority view on whether that broke the social contract (when weighing up the risks and benefits) was different and that he shouldn't attend, I would accept that too. Going back to the example of jeans at a wedding, it all depends on whether it breaks the social contract and what the risks/benefits are: if that person is a key guest and the bride and groom accept that they will only attend if they can wear jeans, then my own views carry less weight. If Genspect think that this person attending in whatever he likes is beneficial to the conference, then my own views don't matter (and I'm likely to turn on my heals and look for a better organisation to help my daughter, just like I did with the autism group). In this case, Genspect clearly failed to even recognise the need for a balance of risk and benefit, let alone have a view on it. Now they are on the back foot and their attempts to manage this are painful.

I still hope that some good will come out of this whole episode. It's certainly blown the whole conversation wide open and thrown some sunlight on it, as has been said above. At the moment, Genspect still represent the best hope for helping children and young people (and parents) to get access to evidence-based care.

I’ve found the side discussion in this thread really interesting, in terms of radfem vs feminism vs GC vs sex realism. But fuck ME does it muddy the waters for me in terms of trying to understand what I am and what my beliefs are?

I’ve heard KJK say enough times that she isn’t a feminist, and Helen Joyce say that she isn’t GC but a sex realist… is there a Wiki somewhere which explains all the factions? I need an easily understandable summary because I have inattentive ADHD 😄

I don't worry about labelling myself and my beliefs so precisely. Or anyone else's. That's the thing about being an academic, I am used to people explaining what they mean by the labels they're using each time they use them.

I do remember telling my DC that TERF was a stupid term because there hadn't been any active radical feminists since about 1980-something. As it turns out that might not be quite true

Ffs it lost my whole post

I am GC always have been. This means I don't believe most stereotypes are true and think people are individual with personality.
But I also am SR as I do accept some differences like men are more likely to sexually assault or just assault. Women can have nasty personalities but they manipulate or abuse through other coercion and emotion not often physically.
You can be one but not the other. All the right wing views are def not GC they think gender is correct and often from God. Other SR believe in GI but don't believe you can actually change sex. So accept tw are men but think they can mostly present as women except in specific situations.

Theoretically as a general rule Liberal feminists believe TWAW and sex work is work, that we have made great strides towards equality.
Marxist feminists believe we need to overthrow the whole system so some align with GI as identity rules, others who are also radical don't.
Radical feminists generally believe the greatest oppression is that of women so we need to overthrow the patriarchy preferable for a matriarchy as women are more peaceful etc. Maybe by removing reproduction from our bodies hence many rad fems being involved in the development of ivf. Generally then radical feminists says TWAM.

in terms of radfem vs feminism vs GC vs sex realism

Speaking as a now old-ish 2nd wave feminist - I attended Women's Lib conferences when I was 18 in the late 1970s - I have a couple of observations:

these sorts of definitions and divisions are par for the course. In the 1970s, there were big debates (and some painful divisions) between lesbian separatists (asking us straights, "Why are you sleeping with the enemy?"), socialist feminists ("the liberation of women will only come after the liberation of the proletariat) and the radical feminists (it's all the fault of the patriarchy).

And really, I call myself a feminist, because for me this encompasses "gender critical feminism" It cannot but do so: the basis of feminism is the analysis of the distinctions between sex (biological, immutable) and gender roles & stereotypes (socially constructed, and historically & culturally specific).

'Twas ever thus, that there are differences - and understandable in a grass roots movement, with so many people involved, and one in which the politics is lived activism.

Ha, forgot that one. Political lesbianism, a tool used by rad fems to bring about the matriarchy.

If it helps anyone; safe schools alliance U.K. are a safeguarding organisation.

They're not feminist, GC or any other type of group.

So all their analysis is from a safeguarding in schools pov.

Safeguarding is working well for most aspects of safeguarding generally in most schools, Ofsted make sure of that.

Not so much within RSE / pshe and the sex and gender reassignment aspect of the EA2010. Ofsted and the gov have not got that right. And it appears to attract an awful lot of outside orgs. Some aspects of SEND are also neglected.

I've never been sure about political lesbianism.My bubble is largely woman-dominated, but I know I'm heterosexual in my preference. So I've always thought that political lesbianism is a bit of a hypocritical swizz.

No easy answers (ref. back to lesbian separatists "Why are you sleeping with the enemy?")

Thanks all. I just can’t help but want to categorise myself into a neat box (being ND I can’t help but be drawn to that) but of course we are all individuals with ever-changing thoughts so I guess that’s not realistic.

Watching KJK’s live on YouTube yesterday she also said she doesn’t personally believe that gender is a social construct. Now this was 🤯 because I have always wrangled with that statement. I’ve found it hard to believe that gender performance/gender roles are brought about entirely by socialisation. I am more inclined to think that the sexes are driven to behave in ways that are inbuilt (i.e. driven by biological differences) in addition to socialisation.

I have stepped away from the parent groups because attendees are being indoctrinated to believe that any strategies to help your child navigate the world are "ableist"

OMG @BonfireLady I couldn’t agree more. I can’t tell you how many FB groups I have joined and left because the prevailing attitude is, ironically, affirmation-only. Now as an ND parent of ND kids I guess I’m fortunate to be able to see things from both sides. However, NT parents are being dictated to by ND adults who are simply projecting their childhood trauma at them. Nothing other than “let you kid do what they want” will do. Throw in some insinuations that your child will soon find themselves in terminal burnout (or worse, that they’ll kill themselves) and it’s a scary mix.

I once watched a parent be told that her child (aged around 10), who was soiling themselves instead of pausing the Xbox to go to the toilet, should be just allowed to do that, because no way should she heap NT behavioural expectations onto them (or words to that effect).

All the right wing views are def not GC they think gender is correct and often from God.

When I read this, I think of all the people I know know, or know of, who are on the right, and especially women on the right, and tbh I pretty much don't recognize it.

Plenty think there are some inherent differences between men and women. Plenty would say that you can make some generalizations, at a population level, about men and women, with regards to behavioural things, and that some of this is rooted in biology. Or, rooted in the consequences of biology. (Say, breastfeeding mothers may more often choose to stay home with infants longer. So a social choice, but one that comes out of a biological fact.)

Usually they don't see some gendered social differences, say in clothing styles, as necessarily negative.

But they all recognize that people are all different, they think women should be educated and have careers if they want them, that they can excel at anything, that they make good leaders, and so on.

The biggest difference I see is that they tend to put a high value on mothering, and see it as being as worthwhile as a career.

Yes agree this is normal right like uk. I meant the right wing USA essentially used as a slur when paired with gc beliefs.

Remember uk and USA left to right goes a bit like this
Labour uk
Tories uk
Democrats USA
Republication USA

Even their left is right wing compared to uk politics.

OMG @BonfireLadyI couldn’t agree more. I can’t tell you how many FB groups I have joined and left because the prevailing attitude is, ironically, affirmation-only. Now as an ND parent of ND kids I guess I’m fortunate to be able to see things from both sides. However, NT parents are being dictated to by ND adults who are simply projecting their childhood trauma at them. Nothing other than “let you kid do what they want” will do. Throw in some insinuations that your child will soon find themselves in terminal burnout (or worse, that they’ll kill themselves) and it’s a scary mix.

I once watched a parent be told that her child (aged around 10), who was soiling themselves instead of pausing the Xbox to go to the toilet, should be just allowed to do that, because no way should she heap NT behavioural expectations onto them (or words to that effect).

Sadly none of this surprises me. I'm just glad that schools, local authorities and mental health services haven't (yet?) been captured by the autism activist groups that are pushing for all of this.

I really do hope that Genspect recognises what's happening here and sorts themselves out 🤞 Otherwise they will be WPATH under another name as far as care for boys is concerned. I'm not sure discussion on the acronym would directly impact care for girls but either way, if they start seeing the acronym as a "sexual orientation" that needs to be accommodated as acceptable, that's enough of a crack to let anything else in because it's a conflation of sexual orientation and gender identity and a step back into gender affirming care.

Discussion and understanding, yes. Accommodation as acceptable as something to be normalised, no.

Just wanted to say how interesting this thread is, and how much I’m learning. I don’t deal with safeguarding much as most of my undergrads are 18+

Thanks, everyone - this is the joy of the grassroots movement that feminism is. And I say that as one of those fanned academic feminists!

Yes, same here, it’s not as cut and dried as some thread topics and the discussion is really interesting and useful.

Modern safeguarding was partly informed by feminist ideas - especially by the understanding that feminism brought about power differentials. That quote apart from maturity and understanding, children didn't have the power to consent to sex with adults, and especially not the adults who cared for them and who they had to depend on practically and emotionally.

So the kind of therapy I saw in that documentary, based on a "family dynamic" theory that assumed everyone was an equal agent in the dynamic and a pubescent girl had as much responsibility for her part in the dysfunctional family dynamic as the father who was abusing her... I think feminism had a lot to do with knocking that on the head.

I knew I wasn't making it up! 😁

This is the view I've seen lots on fwr over the years, and was referencing earlier in the thread about GC.

Although less of this view than there was 4/5 years ago when it was pretty much the consensus/ majority view? Has anyone else noticed that shift?

@Jellycats4life I see it as most of us here being united in sex realism and shared interest in women's and children's safeguarding then beyond that opinions vary significantly.

And I don't worry beyond that on the labels as I evidently still haven't got it clear after years of being here, and as I said earlier I think it gets ideological. I think unless you are deeply committed to feminism as part of your identity it doesn't matter too much.