Dr Upton in the news again

[Sparkyduchess]

I see the lovely Dr Upton is in the news again, who didn’t see this coming 🙄

i feel for the woman facing this, and troubling that she was worried she’d be bullied into accepting treatment from him

https://www.dailymail.com/news/article-16235793/Doctor-quit-UK-Peggie-trans-row-centre-gender-storm-Australia-known-Lis.html

Exactly, and that's why he moved to Australia, where they'd indulge him. I bet the second choice was Canada.

The horrible man.

Personally I'd rather have a female doctor every time. They aren't the ones who keep getting accused of rape and sexual assault. But absolutely for intimate procedures.

This

Let me just translate this

My understanding is this:

1. Patient sees and recognises male doctor masquerading as a woman.
2. Patient becomes alarmed at the prospect of being treated by man masquerading as a woman.
3. Concerned partner backs her wish not to get treated by this one male doctor masquerading as a woman.

Correct.

It's hard to see how this could be misunderstood, but I guess some posters are just unable or unwilling to accept reality.

While this is MN and a focus on women, obvious reasons there will also be men who don't want woman touching them.

Would men be happy for those mens boundaries to be treated with contempt Hi 👋 I'm a man says a 5ft tiny petite woman in jeans 👖

We don’t know this happened. All we know is a patient waited for another doctor. The rest is conjecture.

He did nothing. Absolutely nothing. It’s your fault. You were asking for it, love.

Yes me too.

Edit for clarity, I would also want a female HCP only for intimate procedures and examinations, I do not want a male HCP to show up when I've made my needs explicit.

The point is, the patient would have said "I would like to be seen by a female Dr please", and the hospital would have said "yes, here she is", and if the patient then said "No, a biological woman" the hospital (based on our Sex Discrimination Commissioners definition) would have said "There is no such thing as a biological woman, and here is your female Dr". So, there is no ability to request "a female Dr" because in Australian law, Dr Upton is the female Dr available.

From statements made by Dr Az Hakim AGP is incredibly rare compared to transvestism- and has been overblown in its threat to women. They get off as seeing themselves as a woman but don’t in general use other women to do that.

The real perpetrators of aggression towards women are cross-dressers who have a history of abuse from a dominant female care giver. Some of this is sexualised some of it isn’t. It’s a way of them possessing the caregiver and this spills over into dominating and invading women’s spaces.

My suggestion is the removal of
self-ID will identify these perpetrators as they won’t be able to get a GRC. Their aggression to women will be identified in the assessment process and they will be sent to private clubs to deal with their drama. In theory GRCs will be defunct soon anyway because the only reason people wanted them was to erase the face they are male and Sex Matters is pushing back against that.

This is a many headed snake and we have to be strategic. Self ID supports the idea that being trans is a health and normal state of being, which is a the heart of this debate. If that is idea and actions removed then all the other issue become much more manageable.

Which is totally gaslighted and lying to women.

I'd much rather have an actual man than a trans anything.

We know that Dr Upton has stated publicly that he would treat a woman who asked for a female Dr. We know the woman saw him, knew he was male , and was worried that she would be bullied by staff into accepting him as female. As a result, her husband stayed with her to ensure this didn't happen.

I'm sure you agree no woman should be put on that position by a male Dr or a healthcare system.

Their aggression to women will be identified in the assessment process and they will be sent to private clubs to deal with their drama.

I think you probably have a lot more faith in the 'assessment process' than most of us.

On a UK Reddit site there are many fits of the vapours about recent NHS guidance on sex based ward allocation. I don't understand the logic. For myself I am a natal female with uniquely natal female experiences and in certain scenarios I feel more comfortable with other natal females. Beth/Lis and his ilk (a very small cohort) will never be female. But I would be branded the terfy bigot. Can I get dignity and respect too please?

I'll add my weird boundaries.

I've never objected to male gynecologist or the male nurse who looked after me in CCU. He dealt with everything and helped me do what I could for myself.

I don't mind a male hairdresser.

But you know what, just after an op, I vomited in my hair 🤢. A couple of female nurses helped me in the shower. They left a young student nurse to wash my hair, "who said I've never washed anyones hair", really don't think I could have coped if she had been a he washing my hair when I was naked, a wound down my front & feeling so vulnerable.

The crux of the matter is that as women we realise that realistically at some point in our lives we will probably be treated by a male doctor or other HCP. We recognise this and know that we have the right to request a woman to care for us. It is what it is and we make decisions about our care based on need, on urgency and on trust. They might not always reflect our first choice, but it remains our choice and our decision.

What Upton has totally failed to understand is that it his dishonesty about his presentation that is a primary issue, we are not stupid , and anyway it is easy to spot the lies and we don't like liars. And we also don't like people whose arrogance blinds them to other people's opinions and preferences and deems them irrelevant .

Not on Reddit, you won't.

They rely on free moderators, and a considerable number of these are TIMs who spend a lot of time online in their basements.

That’s a reasonable assessment.

I see it as the government has been duped by the typical politician influential “boys club” into allowing self-ID in to effect therefore giving legitimacy of the trans ideology. Let’s face it the only people that unilaterally benefited from Self-ID are predatory men and we know that they have their tentacles into government à la Epstein.

I would place a huge bet most of the medical/surgical/pysch community thinks this is harmful but are being threatened by loss of registration, livelihood and cultural banishment. Their practice is being informed by not-for-profits not evidence based and this will be frustrating for them.

What people say and what they do in the moment can be two different things.

It is possible, but when things are reported in the Daily Mail you have to admit it comes with a truckload of salt.

I take everything with a healthy dose of salt, no matter where it comes from. No one is free of bias. However the DM has done some much better reporting on all things women's rights/ trans identifying men than say the BBC over the last few years.

"What people say and what they do in the moment can be two different things."

Yes, but in Upton's case what he said he'd do (present himself as a female doctor to a female patient who has requested a female HCP), is borne out by him doing precisely that.

SirChenjins · Today 21:07
We know that Dr Upton has stated publicly that he would treat a woman who asked for a female Dr. We know the woman saw him, knew he was male , and was worried that she would be bullied by staff into accepting him as female. As a result, her husband stayed with her to ensure this didn't happen.

I'm sure you agree no woman should be put on that position by a male Dr or a healthcare system.

I agree with SirChenjins, no woman should ever be put in that position by a male HCP, or the healthcare system.

When a man shows you who he is - believe him. Especially when that man is under oath.

And when the CE of Women's Forum Australia is on this case I believe her.

My argument isn’t that he isn’t a complete shit. Any man that sees a female only sign on the door and thinks they are too special for it to apply to them is the exact reason we have single sex spaces.

My argument is that there isn’t enough evidence in this instance to demonstrate what the Daily Mail is saying happening because he was forcing his “care” on her.

They are shit stirring and if they get it wrong Dr Upton can point to it when he is being a complete shit and get away with it.

As an immigrant to NZ I can confirm the locals don’t give a flying fuck about you and see anyone as an interloper. He will have no support and he will be completely alone there. This bullshittery is only being accepted by the government elites not the general public. He will have a miserable time, then probably come over the NZ where it is a bit more chill and cause drama here as well.

The DM hasn't said he was forcing his care on her. Have you read the article?

I think you are forgetting that Upton gave witness evidence during an employment tribunal. The evidence he gave in defence of his experience and practice as an emergency doctor made it abundantly clear that as far as he was concerned there was no need for him to declare to any female patient that he was a TIM, as far as he was concerned he was/is a biological female and should be respected as such without anyone questioning him.

The Daily Mail is not the source. The source is Uptons mouth.