Helen Joyce

[darada]

I just wanted to say how much I love Helen Joyce. For me she's the best thing about this whole sordid trans business.

I'd recommend you watch a few of her podcasts on YouTube. The clarity of her thinking and expression, her rationality and her non-tribalism are so refreshing. I also love the fact that with time she's run out of fucks to give and just calls out BS much more directly than her earlier comments.

Helen if you lurk here keep up the good work, I have learned a lot from you and we're all lucky to have you on our side in this increasingly important and urgent fight for sanity and our kids' future.

So, you didn't answer the question, instead you have now twisted Corgi's post.

Here is the question again:

"Can you explain why you, personally, want more children to be medicalised and becoming a lifetime patient requiring drugs and surgeries?"

Because that is what she is saying here:"we have to try to limit the harm, and that means reducing or keeping down the number of people who transition, and that’s for two reasons".

You even highlighted part of it.... strange you missed the first part in your bolding though. Almost as if you wanted to emphasise something that you can misrepresent vs what she really said.S

o tell us Dadjoke, you once declared to us that you were after the highest quality of care for children with trans identities. Is that still the case? Because from your posts lately, it seems that you have decided that affirming only with all the medicalisation that goes with it is the highest quality of care, despite now even France deciding that actually using Puberty Blockers is showing little evidence of improving the lives of children. And that is now after the WHO backtracked too.

You used some very weak arguments on the WPATH thread, and you didn't even try to use your own critical thinking to evaluate the information leaked. So, please answer the question of why you, personally, are advocating for more children to be medicalised?

So then, why is the NHS funding extreme body modifications?

I personally think Helen Joyce should be cloned so that we could all have our own Helen. I would even buy a special comfy chair for my HJ clone to sit in and talk at me all day.

I've never seen Dadjoke post anything that isn't

An ad hominem attack
False equivalence
Bad company argument
A deliberately misinterpreted quote

It's like playing bingo.

Ps HP slash hasn't turned me trans.

I think it is a great idea to stop providing extreme body modifications and the wrong sex hormones for their body based on an identity.

Therefore all they need to do is to declare they are trans and live their lives without medicalising an identity.

So, which is it DadJoke? Is it a condition that requires treatment or as you now insist an identity. And identities do not require any medicalisation at all. And in fact, can you name one identity that is not trans that society has to reconfigure itself to accommodate and that causes conflicts of rights with other protected groups?

64 million dollar question! Never seen it answered. Now to read the rest of the thread. Today could be the day!

I don't want to derail but i think this is relevant, bear with me.

I was privileged to see a screening of a documentary about detransistioning the other day, called No Way Back held by WRN.

It featured interviews with several detransistioners and medical experts.

It was eye opening and deeply moving.

Young people in the USA, even children, are able to access cross sex hormones after a 1 hr chat, with no follow up care. 40% are then so dissatisfied either with the treatment and its side effects or with the lack of improvement to their dysphoria that they stop taking them within 4 years, often with permanent damage to their bodies.

Would @DadJoke like to see this happening in other countries too?

I’d like there to be as few people with Anorexia as possible.

Does that mean I’m calling for the genocide of people with anorexia, @DadJoke ?

If transgender people aren't ill, why do they need special medical treatment?

I've got another question allied to this one. Why isn't the NHS providing treatment for all the people who identify as transage, transabled, transethnic and so on? Why don't they deserve help to make their bodies match their true selves?

Same here - and she could have ALL the chocolate biscuits !

No. She cannot have the Tim Tams.

If she came round here I'd root out my emergency packet of Bahlsens Choco Leibniz biscuits. I can't say fairer than that.

Cool.

So no need for medical and surgical interventions on the NHS then - it’s just body modification, so it can be self funded and limited to adults only, same as breast implants, liposuction and tattoos.

Glad you are finally being sensible about this - perhaps hanging around Women’s Place has gifted you this new clarity?

Good stuff.

Joyce said that transgender people , happy or otherwise, are a problem in a sane world, and their numbers should be reduced. Stopping health care won't reduce the number of transgender people.

Do you think what she said would be acceptable if she was talking about gay people?

I am not saying anything at all about the subject, merely quoting what Joyce said about all transgender people, happy or otherwise. Don't conflate the two. She was very clear, and she hasn't corrected it.

Hey DadJoke,

These two things are not the same. One fought for years to be who they are, the other to be who they're not.

One is about gaining their own rights, the other about infringing on others' rights.

Why are you so obtuse? Is it deliberate?

Joyce: in the meantime, while we’re, while we’re trying to get through to the decision makers, we have to try to limit the harm, and that means reducing or keeping down the number of people who transition, and that’s for two reasons. One of them if that every one of those people is a person who’s been damaged. But the second one is every one of those people is, basically, you know, a huge problem to a sane world; like, if you’ve got people that — whether they’re transitioned; whether they’re happily transitioned; whether they’re unhappily transitioned; whether they’re de-transitioned — if you’ve got people who’ve dissociated from their sex in some way, every one of those people is someone who needs special accommodation in a sane world where we re-acknowledge the, the truth of sex. And, I mean, the people who’ve been damaged by it, the children who’ve been put through this, those people deserve every accommodation we can possibly make, but every one of them is a difficulty,

You quoted her yourself, @DadJoke. Her words are right here. Nobody with decent reading comprehension can be in any doubt that you are wilfully misinterpreting what she says, for reasons mentioned many times here.

No. You have attempted to misrepresent what she has said.

Hence you bolded bits.

I am not conflating anything. I am directly discussing exactly what her comment relates to.

So. Let me ask you again.

"Can you explain why you, personally, want more children to be medicalised and becoming a lifetime patient requiring drugs and surgeries?"

This question directly relates to YOUR post. YOU brought that transcript into this thread if you cannot articulate what she said without misrepresenting what she said, you should be wondering why.

Here it is again:

Joyce: in the meantime, while we’re, while we’re trying to get through to the decision makers, we have to try to limit the harm, and that means reducing or keeping down the number of people who transition, and that’s for two reasons. One of them if that every one of those people is a person who’s been damaged. But the second one is every one of those people is, basically, you know, a huge problem to a sane world; like, if you’ve got people that — whether they’re transitioned; whether they’re happily transitioned; whether they’re unhappily transitioned; whether they’re de-transitioned — if you’ve got people who’ve dissociated from their sex in some way, every one of those people is someone who needs special accommodation in a sane world where we re-acknowledge the, the truth of sex. And, I mean, the people who’ve been damaged by it, the children who’ve been put through this, those people deserve every accommodation we can possibly make, but every one of them is a difficulty,

Because by now, all reading along will be asking themselves all about your motives and your credibility if you cannot adequately interpret what she said. Was she blunt? Yes, she was. But she was very clear also despite the meaning you are trying to attach.

In fact, I am now going to go one further and point out to you again, that you have just posted that it is not a mental health condition or a disease. So, tell us again, why is ANY person on this earth medicalising a child for something that is an identity.

Why can't you support your own position on this topic?

Do you think what she said would be acceptable if she was talking about gay people?

It would be correct if gay people were demanding what transgender people were demanding. But as they're not it would be incorrect. And that's why she's not saying it about them.

"Acceptable" or "unacceptable" is irrelevant - the question is whether or not it's true. Some would say it's "acceptable" to say it about gay people, but that's irrelevant because it's false. Some would say it's "unacceptable" to say it about transgender people, but that's irrelevant because it's true.

The problem is the demand, not the identity group:

if you’ve got people who’ve dissociated from their sex in some way, every one of those people is someone who needs special accommodation in a sane world where we re-acknowledge the, the truth of sex

A transgender person who does not demand special accommodation because of their dissociation with their sex is not a problem.

People pretending to be the opposite sex are not a problem (as long as everyone else is free to ignore them). People demanding other people join in with the pretence are.

Being transgender isn't a disease or a mental illness any more than being gay is.
We know the kind of people who describe people that way.

Being unhappy with the sex you were born may not be a disease, and not a mental illness in itself, but there is plenty of evidence that many people (especially young women and girls) seeking to transition have conditions or trauma which are likely to have caused or contributed to their desire to escape being the sex they are.

Given that nobody can actually change sex, and that puberty blockers and medical transition can be disastrous, and that detransitioners are beginning to tell their horrifying stories, aiming to refuxe the number of people who feel the need to take these desperate measures hardly seems like a desire for genocide.

Here is another issue that is very pertinent to this topic.

"if you’ve got people who’ve dissociated from their sex in some way, every one of those people is someone who needs special accommodation in a sane world where we re-acknowledge the, the truth of sex."

• *If a trans person has no medical condition and no disease, why has society insisted that children are put in situations with poorer safeguarding because of it, because sex is not prioritised above gender when sex matters.

Why are male children allowed to sleep in the accommodation for female children? Why are male children being allowed to use female toilets?

This is poor safeguarding for female children, so why is it being allowed because of an identity?

Here is another issue for you to answer to DadJoke. Sports and female children.

Why should any male child compete in a female sports category?

Do you consider that a safe and fair outcome? Yes or no? And please provide details and studies to show why you think that.

Do you think what she said would be acceptable if she was talking about gay people?

You still going with this @DadJoke ?

Gay describes sexuality. The only possible comparison with trans is if trans is described as a sexuality. Is it?

There are various problematic sexualities that are not permitted legally in our society because they are harmful to the vulnerable. Our society has accepted that is not the case with gay people and therefore no issue and there is no comparison.

Many activists however seem to want to not discuss any relation between transgenderism and sexuality.

Perhaps for some trans people their tranness has nothing to do with sexuality and is therefore not comparable.

For some it obviously and admittedly does. It these cases it is potentially problematic to the vulnerable and so a societal discussion needs having.

By health care I assume you mean the medication and surgery which some people who identify as transgender want to be provided to affirm their identity. This is not health care in the usual sense, which is normally for the treatment of medical conditions and diseases.

You insist that transgender people do not have a mental health condition. They obviously don't have a physical health condition which relates to their identity, so I think we can conclude that their desire for 'health care' is not to treat a medical condition, but is in the same category as cosmetic surgery. In which case it should only be available to adults who pay for this 'health care' out of their own pockets, and should not be available on the NHS.

Stopping this so-called healthcare on the NHS won't stop anyone from identifying as transgender, but what it will do is stop children from getting unnecessary and harmful 'treatment' to treat their identity issues and will also stop a lot of the adults from doing so. This will mean fewer people will be harmed by this treatment, which we should all be able to agree is a good thing.

Gay describes sexuality. The only possible comparison with trans is if trans is described as a sexuality. Is it?

The problem that if you have no concept of "right" or "wrong" based on morals or logic, you're just with identity groups. You sort of figure out that you can't say "bad things" about "good groups" and you can't reason why you do or don't say things, and you're left just reaching for analogies.

And you absolutely can't grasp people who aren't even considering identity groups in the first place.

We don't give a shit about "transgender" identification, beyond the specific issues it's causing - medical malpractice, males in female spaces, men winning women's sports etc.

We don't care what identity group is making those things happen - we care that they're happening. If it's about "trans", it's purely because those actions have are being pushed under that label.

If Mormons were pushing for men in women's prisons, we'd be fighting them too.