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.

TRAs have spoken at LWS events. Doesn't normally go well as they usually try and steal the equipment

😂

@themostspecialelfintheworkshop This is ahistorical.
The UK conservative party has had three women PMs because it has had a lot of OMs. The Labour party has had 2 women party leaders, but very few PMs.

The whole issue of safeguarding was a left wing feminist issue. Traditionally the right wing have pushed safeguarding children as being an issue of a strange man snatching kids away. It is the left wing, and especially feminists who exposed the fact that most children are abused by family members and friends.

The Cass Review was commissioned by the independent NHS England. It had nothing to do with any political parties. It was the Conservatives who planned to introduce Self ID until there was a public backlash.

When have they been handed the mic and allowed to speak?

If I can backtrack to the discussion about repealing the GRC movement, I must admit I had thought there must be more going on, e.g. that some GC groups might be actively trying to obstruct / undermine the repeal campaign.
But from what I've read here, it would seem not.

It sounds like it's more about not everyone having it as their immediate focus and that some repeal campaigners are disappointed / annoyed at the lack of support and feel they've not been given a fair hearing and also that some of those dismissing them don't have a complete grasp of the issues. Maybe with some long standing loyalties and animosities thrown into the mix.

Fair enough, it's not what I'd expected but it's helpful. Thanks all.

On the current topic, I think Let Women Speak is phenomenal.

Birmingham and Australia come to mind. There may be others but can't remember which events.

The whole point of LWS is that any woman can speak (and sometimes penis havers if there is enough time). You literally just have to walk up to the mic when KJK asks who wants to speak next.

The Cass Review was commissioned by the independent NHS England. It had nothing to do with any political parties.

Wow, why did they do that then?

No. Safeguarding is not political and that is the entire point of it.

Surely you know?
It was commissioned by the NHS as a review into children's gender identity services after the debacle at the Tavistock Clinic. This a normal thing for the NHS to do after there have been major issues with a service. Cass herself said she thought the review would be very quick, and it was only when she started her review that she realised it was not straight forward.

Yes it is, very political.

No, it was as a result of Keira Bell. I just wondered what spin you'd put on it.

And the idea that this would have happened without support and intervention from the Health Secretary is for the birds.

You want to argue that the Conservatives who were planning to introduce self ID care about this issue?

It was one element. It did not automatically lead to the Cass Review. It was a combination of issues.

the idea that this would have happened without support and intervention from the Health Secretary is for the birds

Definitely

And the idea that the left is some paragon of virtue as regards safeguarding and all the issues here, is also for the birds. Just not how things work. You can refuse to see it if you like but don't snivel about it when you end up being proved wrong.

They are not a mono-block, much like the other parties which contain a range of views. Penny Mordaunt and Caroline Nokes were pro-self ID in their Equalities roles, other ministers and committee members felt differently and developed policy and pushed developments accordingly, most notably Kemi Badenoch.

But you do know that anyway, don't you? I don't think you are really trying to get to any clear point, you're just arguing for the sake of it for some reason, and there's not really much point in trying to engage.

But it's certainly been my impression that there is an actual pushback against repeal of the GRA. And not just because it feels like an uphill struggle. But because there is still a belief in what we used to call true trans.

I think any pushback (which I'm not aware of) is more to do with being pragmatic. I don't prioritise repeal of the GRA because I don't have the energy to still be embroiled in and crowdfunding for this in five or more years' time. I certainly don't believe in 'true trans'. I want to use the momentum created by the GC movement, and all the consciousness raising we've achieved, to campaign against surrogacy, for the Nordic Model, rebuild the lesbian community and focus on the appalling damage porn is doing to our society. I don't want to be hammering on about the GRA in 2030 if strengthening the EA 2010 will do the trick. There are those who are prepared to take the GRA fight on and I'll be glad if/ when they're successful. But please don't tell me that I'm a true trans believer because I'm not waving a flag for repealing the GRA.

This summer I attended this event on the Equality Act.
The group who organised it had no idea what the participants (Jo Phoenix, Akua Reindorf, Maya Forstater and Helen Joyce) were likely to say and their brief to the speakers was to use the EA 2010 as a kicking-off point to a wider discussion. The venue was booked and the title proposed months before the event and months before the GE was announced.

The title was intended to be as anodyne as possible so that the university on whose premises it was held couldn't justify banning the event. As things turned out, the GE was called and suddenly the EA was being cited everywhere. On the night, to the surprise of the organisers, all the speakers came out against trying to repeal the GRA: Akua Reindorf explains in the video why in her opinion it would take years to do so. Maya and Helen agreed. On the whole I trust their pragmatism.

So please, @Datun, don't assume that anyone who's not totally committed to repealing the GRA is some GC-lite true trans believer. That's very unfair.

See, I've come to Repeal precisely because if we don't, we will definitely be crowdfunding forever more! It needs to go. I don't see it as being at the expense of other issues. It's as well as those things.

I think my position is similar to @Pluvia's:

Am I glad that some GC groups are prioritising repeal of the GRA?
Yes. I believe it will help raise awareness of the stupidity of the law and thereby move the Overton window.

Do I think there's a cat in hell's chance of it being repealed by this government?
No. Right now, I don't believe this government would even talk to any group advocating repeal. In fact I can't see a repeal happening in my lifetime.

Am I prepared to put my own time and energy into a repeal campaign?
No. It seems to me that we need a variety of approaches and, as I think I've said somewhere upthread, I feel more in tune with working to neutralise the effects of the GRA.
What's more, I don't believe repeal of the GRA would end things anyway. I don't think this is ever going to go away.

Could I be wrong?
Sure. And I'll be very happy if this proves to be the case.

Might I change my mind?
Yes.

“The Labour party has had 2 women party leaders, but very few PMs.”

No.

Labour have twice had women as acting party leader, temporarily, pending the election of a new party leader following a general election. Beckett for two months, Harman for four months (twice).

I do think we need a variety of approaches.

I'm concerned about the number of young adults getting a GRC. Over 500 people born after 2000 so far, a large proportion will be women. They are the generation who have been taught gender ideology in schools, in part because transition is recognised by the state.

Making the GRA meaningless, or repeal are both good ways to delegitimise the idea, so im happy that feminist are doin both.

I noticed that Konstantin Kisin who I considered to be a GC ally, thought not a feminist, has had a right go at Julie Bindel on X about Lily Phillips. Disappointed in him, but perhaps not surprised.

have only got this far.

They use the facilities for their sex. Or they do what we have been telling them to do forever: campaign for 3rd (or 4th) spaces. And we will support them in that. Until then? They can enjoy (for TW) that full womanly experience of the urinary leash.

This is where I'm at.

I was convinced that ultimately the GRA ought to go, but I've also been convinced by a few different people (most recently and clearly the LGBA released a vid of a panel including Michael Foran, who has lots of good info, including why Forstater won on the basis of 'belief' and this probably being more useful for future legal cases, even if I think framing it as a 'belief' isn't ideal) that other kinds of legal campaigns and cases might make a bigger quicker dent (eg FWS!)