Substack: Unthinkable to Unwelcome: The Overton Window and the Transgender Conversation in the UK

[MyAmpleSheep]

This person argues that the recovery of women's rights in the last few years is based in a deliberate shift of the Overton window. Broadly I agree with the premise that as women (and others) have been able to expose the disadvantages and dangers of accepting the TRA narrative, it has become more and more acceptable to argue in favour of single-sex services and associations, and against inappropriate medical treatments for sex-questioning children.

https://substack.com/inbox/post/167883451

I should probably add for clarity that the author and I disagree on whether this has been a good thing or a bad thing.

Written by the totally unbiased no skin in the game Joanne Lockwood I assume and not some other Joanne Lockwood?https://raisethebar.co.uk/speaker/joanne-lockwood/

Yup. There’s no doubt that women like us have moved the Overton Window, and thank goodness we’ve been able to do so.

Before we did, we were in a position where transactivism had worked quietly behind the scenes, putting harmful laws in place, moving men into women’s spaces without ever gaining consensus that was appropriate and introducing medical treatments for children that were even more harmful than they were unevidenced.

Stigma was then spread from the top down and we were told that these things were all in place and we couldn’t talk about it, for the obvious reason that talking about it would reveal the extent of the power grab.

So yes, we have indeed, through moving that window, allowed the discussion that has led to court cases that have started to undo a lot of the damage men who want access to women’s spaces have done. Those men are raging, but I for one still don’t think we’ve moved the window far enough yet.

The article is right about one thing. Men’s land-grab for the privilege of having access to women is indeed severely dented. They had access to some spaces, but it wasn’t enough. They should have stopped while they were ahead. Their own greed is why we are where we are.

That's a really interesting read, and very reassuring as well...

Interesting thread OP, thanks for posting 👍

Found an archive link and thought I’d post it to the thread in case it’s useful:

https://archive.ph/jWC0p

Thank you OP.

Thank you. I like to occasionally read what the other side is saying.

I agreed witha fair amount of the article but in the opposite direction. It is important to name things. Silence is complicity.

This.

The entire article mentions the word 'women' once.

It completely overlooks the foundational issue of sex being of material importance in some aspects of life. It fails to recognise that many women simply don’t want any males to be included in female only provision and this is a legitimate and uncontroversial want. Whether the risk of trans inclusion is high or low, and whether transwomen are more or less vulnerable than women is irrelevant. I fail to see how or why this needs to be considered. The fact that stating this sat outside of the Overton window reflects a crazy period and I can’t wait until mainstream conversations switch to trying to work out how this happened.

On the point of medical intervention for gender distressed youth- public opinion should have no bearing on actual treatment. The Cass report highlighted this was a problem and called evidence based treatment decisions, as is the case in all other areas of medicine. The Overton window can move like the tide, treatment protocols should not be impacted. Again, lessons need to be learned as to where things went wrong.

"But here’s the truth: trans people haven’t changed. The window has.
We’re not more dangerous, more political, more divisive. We’re just more seen—and that’s threatening to systems that rely on sameness and silence."

Disagree with a lot of that article, particularly timelines, but this is correct. Hell, I spoke to one of my friends a few days ago and mentioned that I was popping in here and she recounted when she used to spend time on these forums (which must have been before I met her 6-7 years ago), but that it got so aggressive hateful over time that she just didn't bother coming any more.

People IRL are pretty much the same, but online and in the media the moral panic is just insane. I mentioned to an ex-work friend that just the Telegraph was pumping out about 2-3 (anti-)trans articles a day on average and she was shocked, but it's all so very manufactured, more so than the last time.

Would you care to comment on the moral panic that is the trans activist response to the Supreme Court ruling?

"What’s happening isn’t a “debate”. It’s a regression. And it’s being framed as reasonable concern. That’s the Overton Window in action: if you can make fear sound reasonable, you can roll back rights without seeming extreme."

Oh look, now they're the one's who are 'victims' of No Debate. 🤯

To be legal and exclude males, female only provision needs to be a proportionate measure to achieve a legitimate aim. The idea that moral panic is driving this desire is disproven by the legality of any permitted single sex provision.

Within the transwomen population, some are lovely, some aren’t, some are harmless, some aren’t, some accept the SC ruling and some don’t. The bottom line is that any and all males, with and without an trans identity are not permitted to use single sex provision for females.

I spoke to one of my friends a few days ago and mentioned that I was popping in here and she recounted when she used to spend time on these forums (which must have been before I met her 6-7 years ago), but that it got so aggressive hateful over time that she just didn't bother coming any more.

Is she also male? Or are you going to say that you don’t know because “nobody can tell”?

Not to mention the shroud waving and 'literal genocide' since the Cass Report.

Hell, I spoke to one of my friends a few days ago and mentioned that I was popping in here and she recounted when she used to spend time on these forums (which must have been before I met her 6-7 years ago), but that it got so aggressive hateful over time that she just didn't bother coming any more.

Totally agree with this. The level of aggression and hate on this forum from the men who want to access women's (especially lesbian's) spaces is truly shocking.

I found this part of the article telling:

"Don’t platform “both sides” on identity. Inclusion is not a debate club. It’s a commitment to equity. Don’t give hate airtime under the guise of free speech."

@BeeSourianteDon't worry. You are perfectly safe in the men's toilets and there are plenty of universal ones available as well.

The article is basically saying, 'You want to be seen as a good person who thinks the approved thoughts, don’t you?' That’s emotional and social blackmail.

If it’s seriously attempting to speak to HR professionals then it’s woefully lacking any discussion of legislation and public policy that would attempt to keep HR professionals on the right side of the law.

On the point of medical intervention for gender distressed youth- public opinion should have no bearing on actual treatment.

I don't agree that doctors can be trusted to regulate themselves, and I believe there is a role for society as a whole to decide whether certain treatments are ethical.

He writes

1. “Challenge false balance.

Don’t platform “both sides” on identity. Inclusion is not a debate club. It’s a commitment to equity. Don’t give hate airtime under the guise of free speech.”

and there it is - the good old TRA tactic of silencing anyone who challenges you. Those days are long gone my friend!

The Overton window has shifted because of massive overreach by the TRAs, closer scrutiny of gender ideology, public discomfort of men in women's spaces/sports etc, people being against child transition and better scientific evidence that transition isn't necessarily all hearts and flowers. Back to reality in other words.

I remember him online from when this was the key TRA tactic and they could be open on that - i.e hashtag “nodebate”, they didn’t have to embarrass themselves with their crappy, self-serving, misogynist talking points. He’s in denial that the world has moved on.

It would be interesting to know what events had the most impact in shifting public opinion in the direction of women's rights.

For a start, I suspect the Karen White case and the reporting around it, even from publications like the Guardian, had a significant effect.

Sadly your user name doesn't exactly spell out tolerance! Do you know the origin of the nursery rhyme Mary Mary?
"The 'silver bells' were a type of thumbscrew and the 'cockle shells' were also instruments of torture, used on Protestant martyrs to 'persuade' them to change faith."