Livestream debate with Mia Hughes and Morgane Oger

[unwashedanddazed]

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=WewreIEBhe4

Only heard a few minutes so far. My he has a deep voice!

Utter bollocks from Oger, just seeing what he can get away with.

"nothing is chopped off except that okay, the testes or the ovaries are chopped off, but you could reconstruct that stuff if you really wanted to."

I mean, this is an incredibly harmful thing to say. Imagine saying this on an internationally streamed and recorded debate!

Who the fuck thinks that ovaries and testes can be reconstructed?

Who declares that brutal removal of body parts and organs are simply 'reformatting'?

The arguments are replays of what we have seen repeated on MN for years and years.

No wonder there are some posters who think that Oger provide 'great insight'. It is evidence free insight from what I have seen so far. Many posters on MN could drive an evidence laden truck through the massive holes in the arguments Oger has declared authoritatively at this event.

Another question (more misuse of information):

Question: I'm curious uh each of you guys' uh opinions on the your opinions on the sex binary, if you believe in it or not, and how that relates to greater discussions around gender identity.

Moderator: Okay. Uh Mia, sex binary. I'm going to give you a metabinary, which is is sex binary or non-binary?

Mia Hughes: I I I am a believer in the sex binary. I am uh until somebody discovers the third game, I am going to be hardcore pushing the idea that there are only two sexes.

Moderator: Gamete is egg and sperm, right?

Mia Hughes: Yes. Sperm and egg. Without a third, you do not have a spectrum. And so therefore, you have a binary.

Moderator: Okay, Morgane.

Morgane Oger: Sex is bimodal, not binary. Okay. And that's the distribution. I know there's a distribution of sex characteristics on all dimensions of sex characteristics always. It is absolutely true that the gametes are programmed in a completely different way in a binary way. There is a two gametes. It's a two gametes system that result in characteristics. The characteristics are caused by the interaction of many many many factors with a blueprint. The blueprint replication processes is complex. It's fraught with issues.

Generally speaking, there are two clusters. What there isn't, right, is certain sex characteristics, the primary sex characteristics extraordinarily rarely flip, but they don't never flip. There's not never XY chromosome pattern. There's not never a Y chromosome pattern without primary sex characteristics. There's not never no Y with male this is really confusing sex characteristics.

No, it's because how many binary …

Mia Hughes: how many are there?

Morgane Oger: that's that's a simplistic question and we're not here to question you can't argue. There are the not 100% of humans have X and Y two chromosome components in their in their genetic

Moderator: what's your answer to this question

Morgane Oger: there are XX there are numerous rare exceptions right these karotypes. I am not saying that I am a genetic female. Okay that would be preposterous. I am saying that there are more there is more diversity to this than the propaganda would have you believe in order to get you to take a simplistic answer to everything else is binary. It's not binary. It's bimodal. And you have the proof of this in a thousand papers done by people who study that stuff. We will show you the distribution.

Moderator: Duly noted. But just to be fair to the person that answered the question, Mia answered it in one syllable. Is there a sex binary? Yes.

Morgane Oger: And I said no. Okay. Fair. Yeah. Non-binary is not the same as that's an identity, right? And that's yeah, we can have another conversation.

Err, maybe if you ever read links you would know that discrimination of trans people is illegal in Canada.

Discrimination AGAINST, you great Nelly.

You must bear in mind this man is extremely deluded. He thinks he's a woman!

To be fair, bollocks are to be expected.

you great Nelly indeed pmsl

Morgane Oger: there are XX there are numerous rare exceptions right these karotypes. I am not saying that I am a genetic female. Okay that would be preposterous. I am saying that there are more there is more diversity to this than the propaganda would have you believe in order to get you to take a simplistic answer to everything else is binary. It's not binary. It's bimodal. And you have the proof of this in a thousand papers done by people who study that stuff. We will show you the distribution.

So he’s saying DSDs exist, therefore sex is cOmpLiCaTEd, but he’s not claiming to be a woman genetically. Surely it follows then that the existence of DSDs has absolutely no bearing on his situation? Make it make sense 🤯

More:

Question: I have a question about uh WPATH of World Professional Association for Trans Central Health came up a few times. There was a comment I think that it still is sort of seen as the standard. I think that maybe despite the fact that the Cass review, other um reviews in the medical literature are in contradiction with it. So what do we do with that? Um and is WPATH legitimate?

Moderator: Okay. So the question is WPath which just to remind ourselves uh World Professional Association of Health Professional Association of Transgender Health. Okay. And this uh which for many years has presented itself as the gold standard in trans health. Mia, I know your answer but I'm going to ask you anyway. Uh is WPAT still the gold standard in trans health?

Mia Hughes: Absolutely not. In North America, clinics still follow WPath and and somehow WPATH has survived all of the unbelievable scandals that have unfolded in the last few years. But WPATH's credibility is completely destroyed mostly by emails that came in an court case. Um, discovery emails in an Alabama court case that revealed this is this is a group that just is guilty of fraud, corruption, and has absolutely no respect for the scientific process. Its standards of care are built on thin air.

They have no evidence and yet they just pretend that there's evidence. Uh they are engaged in politics, not science. And I if a if a clinic is following WPath, if a nation is following WPath now, there's truly no excuse. And and it's it's it's appalling in my opinion.

Moderator: Morgane ..,

Morgane Oger: I'll quote a famous transphobe. Ridiculous. Oh, this is ridiculous. You're talking about ….So, one person making assertions like this needs to have like peer reviewed studies from highly respected sources that validate it. I cannot go around and say universities don't exist. They're lying liars. Okay. I cannot go around saying I need some evidence

Moderator: Mia is talking to a political dimension.

Morgane Oger: No, no, it's not. It's no Mia is saying that you know there are internal, internal documents

Moderator: been politically discredited

Morgane Oger: But it's actually not true. Mia's political discredit, discredit, her, her, her statement is a hugely overblown version of reality. Reality is, this is an organization that includes medical practitioners who have very high reputation, except in Mia and some other non-practitioners viewpoints. There are some dissenting people who say, yeah I don't agree on this on various grounds, but you know what show us the data. Like come up with some data. (To Mia- no not you you are not competent to show the data.)

The data will come from endocrinologists, will come from criminologists, will come from primary care and specialist physicians that will say, look you know we're seeing an uptick in fill in the blank. Right? The reality is WPath has been active for what two or three decades. Trans care has been going on for coming on 50 years now. And this mythical smoking gun, it's never been produced. It doesn't exist.

There is no problem. There are just people running around saying, "My hair is on fire. There's a huge problem." And it's time to stop talking about things as if they were a crisis and let the scientists and the doctors and the universities do their damn job.

Their job is to validate, check it out and see what they can do.

Mia Hughes: Okay.

Morgane Oger: And when the attack is you're not following the following madeup standard, you need to make sure that those standards are the universal standards for that kind of work.

Mia Hughes: May I respond?

Moderator: Morgane, Morgane…

Morgane Oger: I don't know what you're talking the standards have to be equivalent across practices.

Mia Hughes: Yeah, just to be clear, it's not I'm not talking about peer review. I'm not talking about studies. I'm not talking about peer review. I'm talking about these are documents…. WPath was named in a a laws in a legal case in Alabama, and the attorney general ordered WPath to turn over 2 million internal emails of how they drew up their standards of care 8. And a small number of them have been released and you can definitely call them the smoking gun.

You can see in WPath's own words in their internal documents how fraudulent this organization is. So I'm not just pulling this out of thin air. There's actual evidence.

Morgane Oger: Hang on a second. What you are talking about is basically hand over your chat server, right, on a topic and we're going to look for how you're talking wrong about a process that we think should be rigorous. But the process isn't what needs to be rigorous. What needs to be rigorous is the policy. No, it was it doesn't matter…

Mia Hughes: … it was how they made standards of care 8. It was it was the emails on how they drew up SOC8. Would you like me to give some details?

Morgane Oger: Don’t look at how the sausages.

Moderator: In fairness, I think you you spoke for a bit about how Mia is not an endocrinologist and she's ignorant, but I think it's fair to
let Mia provide some detail.

Mia Hughes: Right. So I'll give I'll give a couple of examples of what these emails revealed. So when WPATH set out to um, create standards of care 8, the process started in 2018 and they had the idea that this would be an evidence-based standards for the first time, they would they would have evidence. And so they commissioned a series of systematic reviews from John's Hopkins, one of the best centers in the world. And there's at least they commissioned at least 13 of them. And then the first two come in and this is all in the emails. You can see it. The first two come in and they're communicating with Johns Hopkins and the reviews show that there's only really low quality evidence. There's no good evidence at all.

So then WPath just block the publication of all of the systematic reviews. We've never we've seen two then they showed no evidence and then the rest we've never seen them. They blocked John's Hopkins, which this is not how it works. independent reviews, you don't interfere. And then they went ahead and made and created standards of care 8 as if the reviews had shown evidence.

That's not science, that's politics. Right?

And the other really important smoking gun is after WPATH published standards of care 8 in 2022 September, within 24 hours in the
adolescent chapter the there were minimum age recommendations and then 24 hours later they were gone. And nobody knew what what had happened. They just disappeared. And the the internal discovery emails show that it was Admiral Rachel Levine, who was Biden's assistant secretary for health and human services. He was inside pressuring WPath, his assistants, his team, telling them to remove the lower age limits because it would it would affect the the legal challenges going on at the state level that the Democrats
were fighting. So they changed the international standards of care that the clinics all over the world follow for treating adolescents based on Admiral Rachel Levine's request and based on American politics.

That's just a tiny bit there. I could go on for hours and hours about those emails, but they're emails. It's how they made standards of
care 8. So any organization, any institution, any nation that still follows standards of care aid is following a fraudulent document that is not scientific it's just political.

Morgane Oger: briefly if medical standards of care are wrong, the evidence is in the outcomes. There is no evidence in outcomes that the that this is wrong. What… perhaps… let's say it's true that it's wrong. Let's say that the standards of care are off, which I, I am not of the right professional skill sets to evaluate them in detail. But let's say somehow they are wrong.

The truth will tell us they're wrong through statistics. There are we're very lucky actually. We are in one of the very few countries that follows such statistics closely. I look forward to seeing those statistics.

Moderator: We had the statistics but then they didn't want to publish them.

Morgane Oger: No, no, no. That's not what we're talking about. You're talking about a learned organization saying this is what you should do. Why? Politics. Let's say it's politics. Okay. It is learned organization says this is what you should do. But they don't do the caregiving. The caregiving is done by caregivers. Those caregivers report their data to StatsCan. They report their data to each other. They write papers about it saying, "We're finding that, you know, we treat this thing and that other unexpected thing outcomes. This isn't working." Right? That's where the truth comes is in the outcomes.

I don't think we need to see more to know that Oger really has no care for children who are being medicalised.

it is dismissal all the way... It is like the reviews of international teams around the world simply have not happened. Or that they are all biased and done by non-experts. The disconnected thinking in this man is very concerning.

Question: Hi, my name is Sister Patricia and I'm a male presenting lesbian. I'm not an academic. That's probably obvious to you. My question specifically for Morgane. I came out in 53. I felt like a boy. I wanted to be a boy. I was desperate to be a boy.

But in 53, that was an extremely dangerous thought even for this little Catholic girl. I looked like a bad drag queen in my first communion dress. Well, what I want to hear from you is based on your experience, what do you think the possible statistics are regarding my survival rate if I had transitioned as a child in the 50s versus the glory days that we kind of experience now with the support systems in place and our right to exist.

Moderator: I'm just going to I just want to make sure they're answering the right, the right question. So when you say our survival statistics, what group are you are talking about?

Question: Trans. Trans in general.

Moderator: Uh um Morgane, would you like to take that first?

Morgane Oger: That's an interesting question. And I have I'll try to keep it under one minute. Uh I have data from trans people in other countries right now, right? They are discovered, they're killed in Uganda, in Kenya to a lesser degree, in much of the East African countries, in North African countries, in Palestine, uh in uh Russia, much less so today. But uh 1950s Canada, you're trans. You're standard kid, in a standard household. Your family kills you. They don't get caught doing it. they get away with it.

Um, in the 70s they disown you. They throw you out of the house. In the 90s, kids, they throw you out of the house. In the 2000s, there's huge fights at home. One parent takes your side. Huge fights. One person starts to like get all TERFy and talk about OGD (?). Uh, in 2010, it starts to change a little bit.

2020, it really starts changing. Why? Because in about 2012, we started teaching in schools. At least in BC where I live, we started teaching in schools that who you are only you know who you are and that's fine. And you're great and every and we can have huge battle lines about whether who you are is right or wrong. But ultimately the fact is if someone is going after you because who you are, regardless of what that who is, you got a terrible dark future ahead of you.

And things are much better now than they were in 2015 for youth. Much much better. Um trans rights being protected in, in, in law has made a huge difference. Suicidal rates have gone down significantly. Poverty rates have gone down. When we do the homeless youth surveys in the cities, it's changing.

Fewer of the kids are queer because of we've normalized queerness, LGBT, gender identity, or expression. And we've done it without encouraging anything. Just normalized it. You are who you are. You know who you are.

Moderator: Sorry, I just want to give you a chance. I think you may that's the point. The point is I want to give you a chance to correct that because I think you accidentally said fewer kids are queer. Is that Did you mean say more kids, fewest,

Morgane Oger: fewer quids kids in the homeless counts. Because fewer kids are being thrown out of their house for coming out to their parents or getting caught being queer. But in other countries where the protections aren't there, the stats haven't changed, right? uh you know and I've been helping uh refugees from the LGBT community in uh countries that are not nice to them which and and it's a really clear pattern there. The number one thing that decides how your kids are going to do is if you leave them alone how you're going to do the number one influencer about how I'm going to do as a trans person is who I am is to just be allowed to live.

Moderator: Mia, looking for points of agreement here. It's good that Canada is not like some of the regressive jurisdictions that Morgane ticked off, right? I I I'm older than you, so I do remember that for gay children and also for transidentified children, it was tough and sometimes dangerous to come out. So, that's a good thing, right?

Mia Hughes: Well, I mean, there's I don't think there are any there are pre gay children. I suppose gender non-conforming children are destined to grow up to be homosexual adults. And so I think it's we're not in a better place in that gender non-conforming children now are told that they're members of the opposite sex. They're told that they're trans kids and then they're set on a path towards lifelong medical intervention. So I don't believe that that is a I don't believe that's progress at all. I think we've regressed, but I, I think we were
almost there in that we could accept gender nonconformity and we could accept homosexual adolescents and adults.

Moderator: The early 2010s maybe.

Mia Hughes: Yeah, we almost had it and then this idea that the concept of the transchild came along and just ruined it all.

"But uh 1950s Canada, you're trans. You're standard kid, in a standard household. Your family kills you. They don't get caught doing it. they get away with it."

Really??? In Canada, parents murdered their children in the 1950s and didn't ever get caught?

This debate really has been remarkable.

I'm sorry what??? He actually said that?? 😳

again my mind boggles that anyone takes someone as clearly insane as this seriously

W Path and the APA call it unsupported by empirical evidence.

Oh, the irony!

Question: In the spirit of being in Waterloo and, uh, of protecting children, um, you gave us a definition of gender identity and you told us to brace ourselves in a room of adults. That same definition appears in the safe uh caring and inclusive surveys that happen every year um at our WRDSB, the uh Catholic district school board as well. Um and it's and then it provides a link they provide a link to the children as young as grade three or four um to answer all these questions.

And there's other questions, but since we're speaking on gender identity, I was wondering if you could give us any indication on whether or not there's anything being done to protect our kids um on this front specifically or any actionables that we can do as parents to have more parents aware so that if this is what parents want, so be it. Like a democratic society, um well informed consent, so be it. You'll get more of what you want and what you ask for. But until everyone knows exactly what's going on in the schools and being informed, it's not really um a democracy, right?

Moderator: Okay. So um if I can summarize quite, and this one I think is maybe for me a uh probably solely, um it's what can parents do uh to to respond uh to what they perceive as

Question: or anyone paying into the publicly funded schools and yeah as

Moderator: as maybe overly um torquked or propagandistic um uh surveys or literature or what um you know do you have any thoughts on that?

Mia Hughes: It's difficult to you can look to Alberta, that Alberta is getting it right in restoring something, restoring reality to education ensuring that children get to grow up grounded in truth. But in Ontario I'm not really, I, I there there are great parent groups there are great people there are great groups speaking out um more and more people have the courage to say that this is ideal ideological, dangerous ideological nonsense and that it doesn't belong in our ….

Moderator: tell us about briefly I mean this isn't a commercial tell us about your group what does your group do well that

Mia Hughes: that's right I'm the director of Genspect Canada we advocate for a non-medical approach to gender related issues for children, adolescence and adults. And, yeah, we're going to be focusing a lot on education and health care. And much of it will be providing an alternative to the, the…. , our schools are just infected with this ideology. It's and, and none of it's grounded in truth and it's an enormous safeguarding failure that we thought, that we allowed this to happen. We allowed our children to have their minds poisoned by this.

As for what the individual can do, I would say talk about it. It’s… don't be afraid to talk about it. Show your neighbours, show anyone who will listen what exactly children are being taught.

Um, and explain the impact because it looks harmless, right? And I don't think the people teaching this have malicious intent. I think they're teaching it because they think this is the compassionate thing to do. And that's the biggest hurdle.

You've got to show people who really truly mean well that they're doing harm. And that can be very difficult. But it starts with just talking about it and talking about it in a calm, reasonable, patient way.

Moderator: Morgane* *I'm not sure it's an apt question for you, but do you have any advice for parents?

Morgane Oger: Well, I did run two of my children through the K12 system and I was the chair of the Vanc Vancouver District Parent Advisory Committee which looked after the interests of 60,000 children. Do you have children, Mia?

Mia Hughes: Me? I do.

Morgane Oger: Okay. Okay. Good. Good. Good. So, what do I know? I do know that uh I hear a lot of incendiary language in the presentation like infect things like this. Fascinating. Uh, you know, I I we had a conversation about hate speech before which went viral. Um, but um I I made some recommendations about, you know, maybe we shouldn't use hate speech here. I recommend that um there's a very big difference between telling parents and children that there are other parents and children that are different than like them and that and that's very different than telling children they're trans.

I have never seen a teacher or a caregiver telling a child they're trans. Uh in British Columbia, telling a child they're trans would be uh psych psychiatrist malpractice grounds. Don't know what it's like here. Maybe you are in the wild east, you know, the crazy crazy western maritimes. I don't know. But uh like there are standards of care and you know for children, for teachers, for psychiatrists, doctors and even a medical practitioner talking to a youth asking for gender affirming care is expected and required to look for a kid that's insistent, persistent, and consistent in their crossgender identity. And it's considered a very, very bad thing to do to stick it into
the kid's idea that they're trans. Now, of course, um there's a social media and I think good parenting teaches our kids about about how to handle social media.

Not just on this issue, but on all issues and here it's about identity, right?

I went back and listened to it again and rechecked. Yes, he said this.

There is no limit to the specious nonsense that man is prepared to spout if he thinks it will help his argument. Reality is not his friend.

Question: Is it possible that there's somebody out there or somebody in here who um does not view you as a woman, does not want to call you she and her, and isn't hateful, is not a transphobe?

Morgane Oger: Is that possible? It is absolutely possible that somebody in here doesn't think I'm a woman. I'm going to say a third probably. But I would also say that we live in a society.

Moderator: But no, there was a second part of the question. Yeah. Of that subset, is it possible that within that subset there are people who you would not classify as hateful?

Morgane Oger: Oh, hateful is not what you believe. Hateful is how you behave. Hate speech is saying something by being hateful.

(Goes on about religion)

Question: Morgan, in opening statements, you alluded to I don't know if you use the words exactly panic, but you kind of suggested that there were phenomena in history that that um, you know, we see repeatedly. And I want to point this to Mia because you're the viral queen of social contagion and, and moral panic. And I want to give or response or comment on moral panic from you with respect to this issue.

Moderator: can you just clarify the question a little bit more? Um are you asking her is this phenomenon of moral panic?

Question: Well, I think there's a gap in what we've been able to hear from Mia tonight about social contagion, moral panic, and I I would just love to hear your comments on that in the context of the background.

Moderator: Right. So, the background here is that earlier Morgane, I believe you talked about like um demon worship, …

Morgane Oger: I said that that a moral panic is a some a manufactured concern trolling phenomenon, designed around the concept of there's a them that are harming examples and I gave example and that that's the understood example of moral panic

Moderator: and so if I'm interpreting the question correctly it's you're asking Mia, is she creating a moral panic, or, or maybe the question is does does she think that the trans phenomenon is a result of moral panic

(There is some discussion about the question…. Remains unclear as to what the question really was)

Mia Hughes: I will talk about moral panic. So yeah, a moral panic is when large swathes of the population fabricate an evil or a danger and kind of it's a mass hysteria and they persecute and they go after innocent people and the, the evil or the danger is not real.

So the Salem witch trials of course we all know everybody was terrified of witches and killed innocent women who were not witches. the witches were not real. Satanic panic is another great one that Morgane referred to in the in the opening statement.

This was large swathes of the American population became convinced that there were satanic cults operating out of daycares and they're digging looking for tunnels under daycares. The the evil wasn't real. Uh they traumatized lots of children and innocent people went to prison. And so but, but this situation, is you, it’s, how would I put it? It's like an, an inverted moral panic.

So with with the trans phenomenon, the harm is real. Okay. What I'm speaking about, go on Tik Tok, put in top surgery, and you can see
thousands and thousands of girls with their mastectomy scars gashing across their chests. The harm is real. You can go on phalloplasty Tik Tok. You can listen to detransitioners.

And so, but but society's response to that is inadequate, completely inadequate. We are ignoring it or we're celebrating it or we're demanding that it continue. But then the real inversion is the fear and the panic is directed towards the people like me who are speaking out against it.

So there is a moral panic, but it's not it's directed in the opposite direction. It's directed at the people trying to protect children.

Moderator: (To Morgane) Or again, I'm guessing everything Mia just said, if I flip it 180 degrees, that's your view, right?

Morgane Oger: Exactly. So So but but I think here's here's the interesting thing, right? The facts will be borne out in research,
right? So Mia proposes that the moral panic is in the supportive way of supporting trans people who transition and that if we were to only put a nice wall to contain all those mentally ill people into a bucket, to say no you stay down there, don't talk about yourself
because you're inherently broken, then we wouldn't have the moral panic. Let me try it differently

Mia Hughes: don’t tell me what I think

Moderator: that's not fair.

Morgane Oger: you seem to be saying that the hysterical response, I know it's a bit of a charged word, is in the level the the level of support for the phenomenon of someone transitioning and that if we and and that has gotten out of hand. And you seem to be saying that the problem isn't that people are overstating the transition rates or regret rates. The problem is that there's people out there who get transexual surgery and then show it. And clearly those Tik Tok videos prove that there's a problem. And the moral panic is people don't understand.

People like you raising a red flag saying, "Look, this is out of control. Uh we are like not understanding you and we're saying no, you're a witch."

Moderator: That's actually a very fair summary of of what she said.

Morgane Oger: that's what I think, right? And I propose that that's where we're diametrically opposed. You think that you're being punished for speaking the truth. I think you are completely misrepresenting the situation and the situation is not at all like you say. And the proof is in the medical practitioner data. There is no support.

There's no there's no tsunami of of of uh legal cases. There's 150,000 Canadians who are trans. There's one and a half million Americans who are trans. If 10% of them detransitioned and had been hurt, you would have a significant number of legal cases.

Moderator: In the United States, there actually are a lot of legal cases, but the Canada

Morgane Oger: Yeah, but you don't have the the numbers, right? You have a statistically insignificant number of ….so that the numbers don't show up to support your argument.

Question: in both of your opening statements you referred or alluded to shelters, rape crisis centers and Morgane I understand that you've been involved in litigation connected to the defunding of

Morgane Oger: no litigation but action

Question: in an action connected to such defunding of a rape crisis shelter. And so my question is why does or should gender identity trump the needs of vulnerable women to a sex segregated space particularly given that it's it's vulnerable women who are seeking that uh and why not focus efforts instead on creating a safe space specifically for trans people.

Moderator: Okay, I'm just going to just some background. This is the Vancouver rape relief uh center in in Vancouver. And the the backstory here is that uh the administrators there were um preventing a a transidentified biologically male person from um accessing the space as a volunteer and it became a big issue in Vancouver among the trans community and the question relates more to your participation to my participation. I just wanted to give people the background because in Vancouver it's extremely wellnown as I understand but maybe not as much.

Morgane Oger: give a preamble of what I did.

Moderator: The question I guess is is whether you think it would be better to have a special trans space for people who need to access shelters as opposed to permitting um

Question: and the same concept would apply to prisons or to other segregated space would be a

Morgane Oger: Okay. uh since about 2013 uh there was a there was an advocacy uh uh initiative that I was part of that I was I think it's fair to say an engineer of that um instead of uh attacking in the press the actions of of organizations that discriminate against trans people, go after the money right. And the idea was to advocate for uh Canadian funders to hold accountable organizations that discriminate against people on explicitly prohibited grounds. That became more easy to do, of course, after Bill C16 and the the the provincial bills.

Now, what was not done is like no um no attempt was made to shut down a rape crisis center. That was never done. No attempt was made to uh to to force a rape crisis center to change it behavior.

Moderator: The council stripped funding, didn't they?

Morgane Oger: Here's what had did happen. Some people other than me uh pointed out to the city that a small grant of $35,000 on a budget of one or two million per year, so fairly small amount of money. Which was questionably being redirected to pay for a staffer despite the money was supposed to be used for other purposes, but we'll leave that alone. I'll just put that there as a seed. uh that money uh that grant is renew was renewed every year and that was a grant specifically earmarked for public education and outreach. And Vancouver RI relief had this grant and had had it for some time, and it was pointed out that an organization that discriminates against women on the basis of being transgender, which is a violation of Vancouver's uh standards and a violation of provincial law, is not should not be doing outreach on uh gendered violence and and and domestic violence and such things.

Um they were given a year to uh to change the policy and to find a way to change the policy, and they refused. They said trans women or men off. Basically is what they did and they ate the loss instead of any negotiation or any meeting in the middle.

What was this really about? This was really about a service organization involved in political work. I understand the history of that organization. That organization is one of the original rape crisis movements organizations. Those organizations came to be on politics. The politics of women deserving equal protection from violence that men were given at the time in 73 when they came to be. They were like women…. There were no uh shelters for women at all, and they were one of the first.

However, um that organization is just like, not meeting best standards. There's a lot of reasons why that organization shouldn't operate.

Moderator: because it doesn't admit transidentified biological male.

Morgane Oger: But the the question really that I think you're asking because an organization is just an organization. It's just a it's just a legal entity. This is an like what about the people who experience sexual assault? Do women make up most of the sexual assault?

Moderator: The question is would they be better served at a trans only facility?

Morgane Oger: Okay, I'm getting to it. It's this, you know, you're asking a pretty delicate question here, right? So, absolutely. Um, sexual assault survivors need to be supported in a trauma-informed way and that means taking into account the needs of that person. Absolutely.

Those needs are myriad and complex. The question is though that you're asking is a little different than that.

What you're actually asking is should we exclude people because they are of a demographic that is likely to have….

Moderator: been to be fair. That wasn't the question. The question was, should there be a separate facility, an additional facility for trans people to get to…

Morgane Oger: and I'm getting to it. Um, when we talk about So, sorry,

Moderator: could you answer that question because we have one more person left?

Morgane Oger: No, because that would result in less funding for women's centers. So, that would be a bad idea. In order to be effective, we would have to take away money from women's centers to do that. Because of the the infrastructure cost of running them.

Moderator: Mia what is your answer to the question is it better for trans people to have their own shelters or do you
think a binary system for rape crisis shelters is fine?

Mia Hughes: Yeah, of course. I think female only spaces must exist and this is the zero sum nature again that if a male person is in a female only space then it ceases to be female only. So sure, I think we have to have the female only space and then and then other services other… campaign to get services set up for other people who need it.

So... The man who doesn't seem to have done anything except say 'that is deplorable' about the rat nailed to the door of a rape centre, the other road kill posted through the mail slot or the intimidating graffiti on the centre when it happened, with no care at all for the female people, shows again how little he cares about the needs of female people. Despite telling the world he is a woman.

Because to him, he won't campaign for funds for a specific care facility for raped male transgender people, he will simply ignore the needs of female people under the guise of 'there will be less funding, so we don't want to have a third option'.

The constant use of "cis" is nonsense; it's for the "believers" not most ordinary folk. I'm sick and tired of the peddling of this crap.
Morgane constantly man-splained there, patronised Mia, had way more speaking time (which she seemed quite OK with) and talked over her. He didn't answer questions very well, and waffled aplenty. Boring and tiresome anecdotes
Mia was great- I must read more about her

Howse- how rude you are with your pithy comments re Maya.

Question: in the early 1990s in Canada, there was a public reckoning of sexual abuse in schools, youth, sports, and churches. Uh this reckoning led to safeguarding principles for everyone involved with children including the golden rule uh that there should be no secrets between adults and children and that children should always tell their parents if an adult was trying to keep a secret with them.

With the rise of gender ideology, there seems to be a collective amnesia as to why these principles and specifically this rule came into being and it seems to be going out the windows even in our own school districts. Teachers are keeping trans declarations secret from children's parents. My question is, should teachers keep secrets from parents in the absence of evidence of abuse? Are we creating a new priestly class?

Moderator: I think, as I understand, um, well, it was the rule in Alberta. I think the idea is that if a child goes to a teacher and says, "I'm trans," in some jurisdictions, the teacher isn't supposed to tell the parents. Okay. Um, and the question is, do you agree that that's a good policy?

Morgane Oger: There is a law in every province in Canada and just about in every country that's a modern progressive democracy
that says that the confidential conversation in a school between a teacher and a student is confidential. We have that law so that the school doesn't out the the girls who had an abortion or are on birth control or who were raped. If you go and do it only because it's transness, then that's discriminatory. It's because you don't believe in transness and that is discriminatory.

The thing you're asking for is to strip the ability of a child to go to a trusted elder and talk about things they're not, they don't feel safe talking about at home. That's what you're asking for or you're proposing as a concept. The reason why we have this safeguard is because there are a small number of kids out there who on specific topics cannot go to their parents . Like you know on religious grounds on on on ideological grounds or whatever the reason is and we train the teachers to handle this and we train the the administrators on managing it.

It's not about being trans. It is about confidentiality of things that the kids say don't talk to my parents and …

Moderator: your answer is the the the teacher should keep the secret from the parents.

Morgane Oger: It's part of a bigger picture and that bigger picture is child safety comes first.

Mia Hughes: I'm going to obviously say the opposite. So there is something different about trends in that the change of name and pronouns, this social transition, it's not, um, it's it's a non-medical intervention, but it's actually a really powerful psychosocial intervention. And when a young person socially transitions, adopts a new name and new pronouns, it cements the, the transgender identity in their minds. And it goes,… adolescence is a time of experimentation. It's a time to try on different identities and that's perfectly normal.

But the problem with the, the trans identity is it comes with a medical pathway. And we also have a field of medicine that has lost its moral and ethical compass that is willing to perform interventions based on no evidence whatsoever. And so no, absolutely not. No teacher should be keeping this a secret from parents because if the parents are to stand any chance of getting their adolescent help,
psychoethical, psychotherrapeutic support to try and figure out what has led them to come to the conclusion that they are trans. They need to know right away and they need to be involved. And the very idea that a parent is abusive just for, you know, if her daughter comes out as a boy and she doesn't accept that her daughter is a boy. The very idea that that's abusive is completely absurd.

Morgane Oger: I'm sorry. That's ridiculous.

Mia Hughes: Oh, it's not. It's not abusive.

Morgane Oger:… ridiculous. I have first person experience, numerous (?) experiences.

Moderator: I'm sorry. I'm I'm going to have to use the organizer privilege to to end this.

Oger is both enraging and boring.

It's a familiar trait