The latest fallouts in GC world

[Pluvia]

My terfing energy has been focussed elsewhere in recent months and I haven't been here or on TwiX or social media much. Now I've taken responsibility for tweeting/ comms on behalf of a small but potentially significant LGB group and I discover that there seems to be something going on — another schism — in GC world. Jane Clare Jones's name seems to be coming up a lot. Something seems to have gone on but I can't work out what.

If it was my own account I'd just ignore, but the followers of this account are bringing it up and seem to expect an opinion to be expressed or a side to be taken. Also I'm seeing a lot about 'ultras' and 'lites', which is new to me. Can anyone enlighten me? I need to tread carefully.

I remember a conference that was attended by transwomen where O'Malley got a lot of criticism because there were also children present. Is this what people are referring to?

I guess I must be an ultra......because I don't embrace or accept any the precepts of trans ideology, and think that you if you go along with any of it, even a little bit, then you are propping it up and frustrating the attempts to reject it as an ideology.

I think those who are still committed to left wing politics and working within the confines of the Labour Party must feel they have to go along with some of it, in order not to be seen as transphobic or hateful - or mean and uncompromising in any way. When you have a public profile, or career that is rooted in left wing politics - how you are perceived by others is deeply important - and you may well feel you have to make alliances with believers in order to progress your goals.

We're at the stage now in which, officially, puberty blockers have been indefinitely suspended.....even though they will be used as part of a supposed trial in the new gender clinics......which is a definite step forward.....but Wes Streeting is still talking about " trans kids" rather than about children suffering dysphoria and distress. Maybe he feels he has to do this..... in order to get backbenchers on board......but in doing so he is not puncturing the bubble......which to my mind is what needs to happen.

I accept this is going to take a long time to turn around ,and that the steps will be incremental...but there definitely need to be voices which are uncompromising in speaking the truth, and in not using the lingo, or accepting it in any way.

I remember a conference that was attended by transwomen where O'Malley got a lot of criticism because there were also children present. Is this what people are referring to?

I'm referring to their whole approach, more than individual actions.

JCJ should probably leave Twitter

The single thing you said that I agreed with. For her benefit, for everyone else's.

This version of events by @AlisonDonut is completely wrong.

And no, it isn't.

Thanks

Ok. I'm just trying to figure out who to support with my time and money

Is this all 'just' a social media/twitter war? Have to say it has largely passed me by as I'm not on social media - apart from this and one other forum and the odd comment under an article in The Times.

Just noticed a piece by Andrew Doyle talking about GC extremists and it all seems quite vicious.

Thanks.

As a general point, I am finding the lack of specifics quite frustrating. I understand the need to be careful about talking on social media but I started following this thread because I was hoping to work out what's been going on.

For e.g. are there GC groups who actively support the GRA and/or who are trying to damage the campaign to repeal the GRA?

Transgender Trend have been a consistent steady presence throughout if your concern is safeguarding.

I'd say if your concern is safeguarding, go on a safeguarding course and volunteer at a local school or get onto the local committees.

Well, today’s wider lens podcast sounds like Sasha has dumped Stella, so that might allay some of the fears expressed here about Genspect

Yes and they don't get drawn into the infighting, are respected by both sides.

Sorry was replying to the suggestion of Transgender Trend. I second it.

Thank you

That tweet by Stella is problematic

I stopped listening [and I loved listening to them both] after the Man in a Dress incident. So I'll have a listen to this now. Thank you.

It is really hard to keep up!

For e.g. are there GC groups who actively support the GRA and/or who are trying to damage the campaign to repeal the GRA?

There have definitely been suggestions that it was unhelpful to call for repeal in the past. I can't think of any specifics offhand.

I think Stella is hugely energetic and saw such huge need in so many directions that she tried to get too much set up in a hurry for there to have been the necessary oversight and clarity of direction around some issues. And in her eagerness to get things moving I think she's probably not been as careful as she should have been, either with what she's offering (i.e. there's such huge and urgent need, we must get something up and running rather than wait for perfection) or with her involvement of partners (surely our enemy's enemy must be our friend?). And when you bite off more than you can chew things can slip through the gaps, if you'll forgive the mixed metaphors.

I was pretty sympathetic in many ways and put the slips mostly down to slight over-excitement, slight self-oriented tendencies (all understandable in those hectic first days of trying to bring some new perspectives into what seemed a world of unremitting madness), but I did see one of the detransitioners who had been involved with Genspect's work sounding pretty hurt about how the experience had been for them, which gave me pause for thought.

Just noticed a piece by Andrew Doyle talking about GC extremists and it all seems quite vicious.

That piece is eye roll worthy. I like Doyle but he enjoys stirring it all up.

For me, anyone who doesn't see AGP males as part of the problem has a fundamental lack of understanding of what the issues are for women's rights and safeguarding children. Even some people I in other ways like and respect have this blind spot. KJK does not, and she calls it out and she gives a platform for other women to do so, even when that means taking risks. That's why people like her.

As i tried to explain, people are framing it as two distinct issues - a problem with GRA and one of self id. GRA is too big an issue to deal with, no government will repeal, so ignore the current system and concentrate on self id instead.

So the aim is to allow GRC but ensure that the diagnosis remains. Governments can tinker about with fees, cooling off times and process, but as long as medical diagnosis occurs its not self id?

If a group is GC, why are they so trusting of the diagnosis process, let alone the diagnosis itself?

Its ok that men get female bc, because they have a diagnosis and we will find a way to ignore all of their id?

Its ok to have the GRA process and watch more and more people recieve a GRC, but that wont enforce the idea that its possible to be born in the wrong body, because ....?

I think shittienes sis very much going both ways on this and the whole pronoun question. Frankly I have little innate sympathy for JCJ's position or a lot of others in that camp, I think they are extremely paternalistic to other women and essentially want to steal their political voice for themselves.

However, the idea that anyone who does not think the best approach is to start advocating for repeal that they are somehow compromised or stupid, or to tell everyone they need to stop using prefered pronouns the same, is bullshit.

It's entirely possible to want to see the end of gender ideology, or even those particular practices, and not think that is the best way forward.

By insisting that your own view on how that should be approached is the only way you are doing precisely the most shitty thing that people like JCJ are doing to other women. Which is telling them they need to accept not only your ideological priorities about practical assessments of strategy or be "impure".

It's all high school clique bs.