Graham Linehan: On Newsnight

As an archivist I have tended to cover people who are key influencers in this debate, but I have probably focused too much on those with whom I disagree. To remedy this I am going to give Graham his own series. I know it’s not exactly Netflix but his role needs to be on the record. I will start with his appearance on Newsnight, interviewed by Sarah Smith. Transcript below and a link to the YouTube.

Linehan Newsnight

Sarah Smith interviews Linehan

Smith starts the interview in, what seems to me, an accusatory tone. Full disclosure, I dislike this style of interview intensely, with both male and female interviewers. I think the idea is that if you rattle the subject they may reveal more than they otherwise would. At the same time, female interviewers tend to come in for more criticism, in general, and clearly it’s a very emotive topic, for me, so, I am not exactly impartial. That said, having watched it a few times, I am inclined to agree with Linehan’s sense that it was an ambush. Here is how the interview opens, after a perfunctory introduction. 👇

White Knighting?

Linehan explains that he felt obliged to step into the debate because he was witnessing the abuse and vilification heaped upon women, like Jane Clare Jones and Kathleen Stock, Graham felt a duty to speak up and also more able to, as he is self-employed. (As we have seen this did not protect him). Had a woman said this it would be unproblematic but I could already see he would be vulnerable to the accusation of “White Knighting” (Smith will raise this later in the interview). As an aside, men really can’t win on this one. I have been irritated myself with Johnny Come-Latelies entering the fray, who seem unaware the women have not been screaming from the rooftops, on this topic, for years and years. Linehan has been at this for years, at significant personal cost, and it is difficult to navigate how to be a male ally in this fight. I would just say, in comparison to Matt Walsh, Linehan is practically Graham Greer.

Also, to feminists like Janice Raymond and Sheila Jeffries, I am a Jane-Come-Lately and, no doubt they are, justifiably, irritated their pioneering work gets less mainstream attention, than it should. In the end I suspect the media will amplify whichever voices they find more palatable /moderate, to the frustration of us all.

Toxic Debate

Next Smith questions whether Linehan is adding to the debate in a constructive manner. 👇

Graham asks for examples and she duly delivers, with a bit of a chuckle, I might add. I presume she doesn’t think these interventions are funny because she is highly critical of Linehan’s rhetoric. So is it a “gotcha” chuckle?

It’s worth pointing out that Smith seems unaware that women are routinely called “Nazi” ; for speaking up about sex based rights or opposing “trans” medical treatments given to children. This, sadly is not confined to those my son dismisses as “nutters on the internet” The Council of Europe and a coalition of “Charitable foundations” have badged the disparate group, opposed to gender ideology as “anti-gender” activists. This has allowed them to lump U.K. feminists /femalists in with Hungary’s Viktor Orban, for one. Orban is also keen, on restricting of both abortion and gay rights; treating us as if we are allies is known as the association fallacy and is intended to discredit us. I have done a series on these documents which you can read here:

Moral Panic?

Smith is confusing a retaliatory /defensive strategy for a pre-emptive strike.

Here is how Smith responds. I wonder if this is already coming back to haunt her.

Puberty Blockers!

Graham responds to defend his position, pointing out that we are performing experimental treatment on young women but it is actually worse than that. We are giving these drugs to children, of both sexes, as young as ten.

I believe the actual drug used in the U.K. is triptorelin, which, by the way, is also used to chemically castrate sex offenders. The specific drug is relevant in the U.K because the makers of Triptorelin are Ferring Pharmaceuticals, who gave the Liberal Democrats, U.K political party, £1.4 million in donations.

I did a piece on this funding.

Liberal Democrats & Big Pharma

Furthermore, children put on puberty blockers will invariably progress to cross sex hormones. (98%) and they will be sterile and have ruined sexual function. Don’t take my word for it, here is Marci Bowers; a trans-identified male and a surgeon who performs surgery on “trans” patients. (Infamously on Jazz Jennings).

I should also add that Bowers also works to try to help rectify female genital mutilation and is one of the most high profile to speak up about this. Cynics may see this as damage limitation, and it could be self-interested, it could also be a genuine concern at seeing the results of puberty blockers on the operating table. This is because boys will have stunted genitalia which will not only make it harder to re-identify with their sex but will also make any genital surgery more difficult; crudely there will be less material to work with.

Less heat, more light, Sarah.

This is Smith’s response to the concerns raised about puberty blockers. I am tempted to say “less heat, more light,Sarah!”. Notice she does not respond to the substance of Linehan’s point but dismisses his expertise and focuses on the “offence” angle. Well, given this is happening to my son I frequently call it “Mengele Medicine”. Sue me!

Graham pushes back hard on this point and his rebuttal comes across strong when you watch him speaking. (at the 2:30 point). Here is the exchange. Notice she cuts him off and doesn’t allow him, from my vantage point, to make his point.

I also found this an astonishing admission after Linehan raises the issue of the 35 staff members who have departed the Tavistock. Many of those ex-staff became whistleblowers and some of them were interviewed by other Newsnight Staff!

I am inclined to concur with the theory that Newsnight were worried about the excellent research done by other journalists on the same team. This may represent real divisions in the Newsnight team or a belief that a hostile interview, with Linehan, would persuade Stonewall et al, of their “balance”. (The BBC was still in various Stonewall “schemes” at this point.).

Bodily autonomy versus child safeguarding.

Sarah also seems to be woefully unaware, or disingenuous, of what is being taught in schools about “gender Identity”; I am going with disingenuous because her own employer produced something, aimed at children, claiming there are a hundred genders. She seems to be arguing for bodily autonomy here 👇. Remember kids are referred to the Tavistock as young as three and we start puberty blockers at 10 years old. Should it be entirely up to them?

Graham pushes hard back at this point and again, you can see the passion and urgency in the recording. (Time stamp 3:07).

Smith is utterly dismissive on this point; calling it ridiculous exaggeration.

Gay Eugenics.

Graham then brings up the reports of homophobic parents at the Tavistock.

Here are the reports of the Tavistock whistleblowers supporting his claim. Smith studiously avoids responding to this point.

Both sides!

Linehan makes it clear that the women he supports are being deplatformed, attacked and getting rape and death threats online. He sees it as his role to amplify these voices. He says he would be happy to step aside once they are given a fair hearing. He also points out that he has had threats, police visits and been doxxed, as had his wife.

Smith does not respond to any of this. Nothing about the sterilisation of proto-gay kids. Nothing about the silencing of women, the threats or aggression. Instead she, predictably, attacks him for his presumption.

There is some repetition of Smith accusing Linehan of ramping up the toxicity of the debate as if the interviewer wants the viewer to be left with that impression and not what is being done to children. She shows no curiosity about this, at all; which is shocking for an ordinary citizen, let alone for a, purported, journalist.

Graham points out that a number of prominent people, even ex Stonewall founders, pleaded with Stonewall to open dialogue, precisely, to detoxify the discussion. Stonewall refused, the same day. Smith could have probed this a little further but, instead, she read out a prepared statement from Stonewall. There is no surprises in their content, it’s the usual claim that “trans” people are oppressed, abused and hate crime victims.

Graham is allowed a final response until he is cut off. He is cut off at the word children which seems fitting since this is what will be remembered from this interview; the complete unwillingness to consider that something really dark was happening at the Tavistock.

Conclusion.

Linehan is probably correct in his assessment that this interview was not a serious attempt to address the concerns he, and many others, were raising. However it felt, at the time, I think he has been vindicated and Sarah Smith should be haunted by her role. Imagine if so many journalists had not failed to do their job? Had this been stopped at the time of this interview maybe the reckless prescribing, currently harming my son, would have been stopped.

Final word to another Tavistock whistleblower.

If you think what I am doing is worthwhile you can support me here.

https://www.paypal.com/paypalme/STILLtish

Researching the impact of Gender Identity Ideology on women’s rights, child safeguarding, freedom of speech and the truth. Speaking up in the hope that people wake up to the harm we are doing to our gay, autistic and other vulnerable groups.

£10.00

Stephen Whittle 2

Featured

This is some content from YouTube. When I first penned this piece I could not find the original. Someone contacted me and alerted me to the YouTube which still exists. You can watch it here 👇

Hormones: Stephen Whittle

The screen shots I did, back in December 2020, are quite revealing.

Do it to Julia!

Hormones: Feminist, Transgender and Intersex

Before I begin a word about Whittle. Whittle is female but has taken testosterone, had multiple surgeries and adopted what they believe is a man’s ”gender” role. This would appear to be Whittle’s idea of ”living as a man”. Asked why the on-line discussions, about the Gender Recognition act, were so male-dominated with a noticeable absence of “transmen” this was the answer given: 👇 Sproggets! 🤷‍♀️ (Clip from that radicalisation portal that is mumsnet).

For background about Whittle here is an interview they did with Christine Burns, of the Trans Lobby Group, Press For Change.

Whittle: Interview

In this interview Whittle explains their sexual attraction to both sexes but how they married a woman. They have four children. Whittle fought to gain the right for their partner to be artificially inseminated, with donor sperm; also tried, thankfully failed, to be recorded as the “father” on the children’s birth certificates. Whittle was brought up in a council house on one of the largest council estates in Europe. The father sounds rather abusive and this is one of the stories Whittle tells about him. One wonders what toll it takes on the female psyche to be presented with such an overt display of aggressive male dominance?

The fact this was triggered by wearing apparel, traditionally reserved for the male sex class, is also intriguing. Is Whittle’s entire life a fuck you to the Father or an over-identification with the oppressor class? A strategy of escape or one for dominance? I suggest it is a combination of the two.

There are complex reasons for females to reject their sex class, some of them invite our compassion; such as extreme sexual abuse /paternal violence. Girls learn early that inhabiting a female body invites unwanted sexual contact. My compassion, for Whittle, is severely limited by the role they have played in throwing the bodies of other women in the paths of dangerous men. In the dismantling of women’s same sex spaces Whittle is, perhaps unwittingly, behaving like Winston Smith in 1984. Whittle’s life is one long “Do it to Julia”.

One of the ways Whittle harms women is a denial that male pattern offending remains the same in those who identify as ”trans”. One claim made in the Guardian had to be retracted.

The reality is the pattern of sex offending remains exactly the same. There is thus no argument for removing single sex spaces for women.

Whittle also had a side hustle of writing for porn magazines. The overlap between porn-saturated culture and trans identities is such a central feature of this ”community”. At least Whittle turned a profit.

Transitioned States: Hormones: Whittle et al.

Now to the event at which Whittle spoke. It was chaired by Jo Winning who works with Zoe Playdon running a course in Medical Humanities. I cover Zoe Playdon in this blog post. 👇

C. Burns: Trans Britain. Part 13a

Whittle is preceded by a campaigner on intersex rights, Valentino Vecchietti, who raises the issue of medicalising children with variations in sex characteristics /Disorders of Sexual development without informed consent. He includes the removal of gonads which leads to lifelong dependence on hormones, issues with bone density and sterility. This is precisely the same set of issues with blocking puberty but, of course, the “trans” lobby doesn’t want to talk about that. Vecchietti talks about “trans” and “queer” children. This is a clip from one of their slides.

The next speaker is Celia Roberts, a professor of Gender and Science Studies. 😳. She talks, with breathless excitement about hormones as agents of social change.

Roberts has studied hormones for twenty years and is clearly very enthusiastic about their use:

And here she goes 👇

Despite this, I found her quite a compelling speaker as she covers the role of hormones in factory farming, and horses bred to produce female hormones. The horse hormones were for use in both menopausal women and for trans-identified males. She points out that hormones extracted this way were found to be harmful to menopausal women but was strangely silent about the risks to trans-identified males. She does explore ways in which the administering of hormones can be “oppressive” and this includes the chemical castration of sex offenders and the hyper-stimulation of the ovaries of surrogate mothers in India. Nothing about what is happening to kids at gender abattoirs, though. She says that withholding hormones can also be oppressive though she does say using hormones should be approached with caution. Well worth watching and she drops the names of some “queer biologists” should you feel inclined to further research.

Stephen Whittle

Now we come to Whittle’s part. He opens with a slide about what you would do if you were offered a “happy pill”.

Whittle claims this question is routinely asked at Gender Identity Clinics here (U.K) and the United States. Whittle proceeds to say that of course people would answer yes but no such pill exists for “trans” people.

Are you happy with what you have done?

This is next of the slides Whittle uses to defend their work. People have criticised the impact on the Butch Lesbian community by the widespread “transitioning“ of Lesbian women. Whittle is often heckled by Lesbians, we are informed. Clearly they are perfectly aware of the impact on the Lesbian community. In this talk Whittle boasts that Butch Lesbians approach her and say they wish they had the guts to ”transition”. I was left with the impression that Whittle’s response to this, legitimate concern, is one of mockery.

Whittle goes on to describe “Butch Dykes” as unable to receive sexual pleasure and rejects this life for ”himself”.

Here Whittle shares a slide about the meteoric rise in girls referred to the U.K main Gender Clinic. This is a cause for concern to many, rational, people but, to Whittle, it is a sign of the success of the Trans Lobby. This is a cause for celebration because the stigma of being ”trans”, {becoming a lifelong dependent on the pharmaceutical industry} has been removed. As you can see kids as young as three are being referred to the Tavistock (Gender Identity Development Service G.I.Ds). If Whittle had checked with adult clinics they would not find a concomitant rise in adult females coming out as “men”. . 🤷‍♀️

Whittle knows autistic people are also over-represented at Gender Clinics. The phenomenon is so widely known trans-activists cannot deny it. Their spin is that theories about the origins of autism proves the idea of a wrongly sexed brain. An alternative hypothesis is the difficulties of responding to social cues makes many autistic kids less able to navigate social expectations for their sex. If much of sex stereotypical expectations is embedded via socialisation this explains why autistic males, and females, may find themselves out of step with their peers. Transgender Ideology promotes the idea these kids are really ”trans”.

Females with autism are often under-diagnosed so their prevalence at Gender clinics is even more striking. One theory about late diagnosis hinges on female socialisation providing autistic girls with better ”masking” skills. They are taught better social cues because ”reading” other people is a survival skill for the female sex class. As a result they “pass” as neuro typical, better than their male counterparts. Whittle also these youths often have co-morbidities of mental health issues. This still doesn’t raise any alarm bells for the Trans party faithful. Instead this is put down to ”minority stress”.

Here are some figures shared by an Autistic society. As you can see as many as 30% have autistic traits. Females, with diagnosed autism, are over-represented by 10:1.

Here the high priestess of the Church of Gender even claims affirming a ”gender identity” can cure autism. (This clip is taken from a discussion Dr Jo had with our own Helen Webberley of Gender GP infamy, on their podcast).

Next slide, as I recall, was to deflect criticism about trans obsession with sartorial choices indicating a ”transgender” identity. Here Whittle is saying ”Lesbians do it too”.

Here Whittle points to the rejection of female attire by ”trans” identified females. Notice that trans boys ”hate” and trans ”girls” desire the pink and frilly.

This was an interesting aside. Whittle calls Julie Bindel a friend though they disagree. The argument that, in an ideal world, nobody would feel the need to become dependent on pharmaceuticals /surgeries to live an ”authentic life” should be the mainstream opinion. It is, however, now likened to some sort of demonic plan for mass extermination.

My “happy pills”!

Here Whittle simply promotes #BigPharma. This section was introduced, by Whittle, as about my ”happy pills”. The impact of male levels of, synthetic, testosterone on a female are quite different to the impact on a natal male. The slide should have examined the impact of synthetic testosterone on a female body. Whittle could have refected on the elevated risk of multiple sclerosis (x7) for males taking synthetic hormones which mimic oestrogen at levels not normally found in males. Whittle also has multiple sclerosis but has no hesitation promoting drugs enhancing the risk for natal males. Trans-identified males are also having their testosterone blocked so, presumably this slide could be used as is a cautionary tale for them.

Here are some side effects. Obviously some of these are desired for those in flight from their sex. This is from a site targeting menopausal women so it says nothing about the impact on fertility or vaginal atrophy and elevated risk for a medically necessary hysterectomy.

I know there are professional feminists who are critical of media outlets that put the spotlight on individual Trans Lobbyists. I have no such hesitation. It is because of this ideology that our gay boys are on the #TuringTreatment and our young Lesbians are having, unnecessary, double mastectomies. Also in case you think Whittle is going to stop here is an interview where Whittle advocates forcing women to give up single sex spaces. Whittle is no friend to women.

Time for a spotlight on the vichy women collaborating with this ideology and placing their own, excessive, need for validation above the harms to women, girls and gay boys.

If you are able to support my work you can do so here.

https://www.paypal.com/paypalme/STILLtish

Researching Gender Identity Ideology and the harms it is doing to women and girls as well as gay boys, like my son.

£10.00

Detransition 5

Featured

Contrary to my usual practice I cannot link a PDF here. Below is the on-line link to the paper. It is open access but download and print are disabled.

Paper on detransition

Some of you may be familiar with The author, Kirsty Entwhistle. She is one of the Tavistock whistleblowers and was, previously, based at their Leeds branch. You can read Kirsty’s open letter raising her concerns here:

Open letter to GIDS

My son was referred, aged 19, to the Leeds branch of the Tavistock, last year, by my own GP. I have no way of ascertaining who prescribed the cross sex hormones he obtained, just six weeks later.

Yet another clinician raising the issue of detransitioners while the government seems committed to legalising the Woke Gay Conversion Therapy under the guise of banning it. 😳. The abstract references another paper which called for empirical research on desistance and detransition. The new demographic, referred to Gender Clinics, have been documenting their experience in support forums for those who know this was a mistake. It is now urgent that we record the detrans experience, from anecdotal, to clinical research. Thankfully this is now starting to happen.

Here is the abstract to Kirsty’s research.

I will see if I can get access to the Butler Hutchinson paper, in full, to add to this series. For those of you with access, to the Journal for Children’s and Adolescent Mental Health, here is the link:

Butler and Hutchinson

As with the other pieces in this series the call is for some formal academic papers to capture the experience of this cohort and commence systematic follow up of outcomes. Gender Clinics seem to have determined that their role does not require formal tracking of *all* their referrals. They need to be compelled to do so they can evidence that this ”treatment” relieves Gender Dysphoria and that medical responses are the only way to alleviate the distress. The decision making process of teenagers and young people also requires more consideration; given how many detranstioners state they did not feel fully informed.

We need a shift in clinical practice to address the root causes of this bodily disassociation rather than funnelling sufferers down a medical pathway.

Those of you on twitter may be aware of Claudia Maclean. This is Claudia’s story as covered by Julie Bindel, in 2007. Claudia continues to speak up for our gay youth, for which I will be eternally grateful. I want a world of true diversity where a gay boy, like my son, with all his variant presentation of masculinity is free to be himself. I do not want a world where he is coaxed into a faux-straight, medicalised closet before he can enjoy a fulfilling, sexual, relationship with the sex to which he is attracted.

You can read Claudia’s story in the Guardian, of all places:

Claudia’s Story

Modern routes to inculcate Gender Dysphoria in our kids are linked to the rise of the internet and confessional content by transgender influencers. Binge watching this content is something many detransitioners say fostered a desire to transition. In the U.K prominent children’s organisations , such as Childline (run by the NSPCC: National Society For the Protection of Children) promote these transgender influencers in, from my perspective, a reckless fashion. This played a role for my son, in addition to the relentless homophobic bullying that goes on in our schools.

Fifteen years after Claudia’s experience no lessons have been learned. The same inadequate assessments are happening to our troubled youth, from within a captured NHS. The role of inducement and coercion is driving our kids and vulnerable adults down a tragic path.

NY Times: Product Placement

You are the product. Exhibit A. Who among us does not think this woman seemed in dire need of therapeutic help and not the surgeons knife. Yet here the New York Times are publishing this as a tale of redemption and authenticity. How Mac McClelland went from staging her own violent rape to address sexual trauma to more self-harm. What message does this send to vulnerable young women in flight from the dangers of living as a woman?

This story, coincidentally, came to my attention as I was writing this piece. We learn that the subject is an asexual with a boyfriend. They have already had a double mastectomy and their uterus has been removed. They refer to their ”native penis” sometimes called the ”clitoris”. This is not science It’s a belief system. They talk about how they want to retain their vagina but also it’s a case of ”penis or death” . 👇

The quasi-religious language is common in the phallioplasty files, as covered by the YouTuber Exulansic. The Gender surgeons are the priest class, administering the trans rites required by Gender Jesus, to their willing disciples. It’s a new religion fuelled by the techno-barbarism of the Gender Industrial Complex. Mining profits from our bodies as if there are endless spare parts grown on a human meat farm.

Back to the article:

In a strange way the more extreme proponents of body modification, in the name of the Gender religion, seem to convince the clinicians it’s the right path for their patient. Nobody would do this to themselves unless it was right for them, would they?

Here a detransitioner speaks out, at a meeting I attended. Only when she joined a support forum for women, who had also gone through hysterectomy, did it dawn on her this was a uniquely female experience.

Some of the people at the detransitioners meeting were themselves involved in the Gender Industrial Complex. If I had sat in a room with young Lesbians who, between them, regretted testosterone, double mastectomies, hysterectomies and ovary removal, I would have left the Industry immediately. Yes, I mean you, Stuart Lorimer: Seen below with Susie Green accompanied by an excerpt from an interview he gave. Our mutilated kids are to fund Stuart’s pension plan.

Excellent question below. Do the NHS and Gender Clinics think about detransitioners when they dish out drugs to our teenagers? Or the Puberty Blockers they are giving to 10 year olds? Personally I would not sleep at night.

Here Bernadette Wren acknowledges the political pressure from third sector organisations (Lobby Groups) on services like GIDS. Mermaids is a pernicious influence on the Gender Industrial Complex. Mermaids CEO, Susie Green, arranged to have her 16 year old son undergo sexual reassignment surgery, in Thailand. Her career seems driven by a desire to justify this decision. Bernadette may also wish to divert attention from the role the Tavistock Gender Identity Service played. She worked there when they introduced the Dutch Protocol and began putting children, as young as 10, on Puberty Blockers.

Here is a reminder of what Bernadette told the Parliamentary Inquiry on Transgender Equality. This does not sound like a reluctant, cautious clinician. It sounds like a statement from a social justice warrior . “It is a social revolution that many of us really fought for and wanted around sex and gender”.

The admission that they were heading in an unknown direction! The breathtaking hypocrisy of blaming the appearance of so many natal females, at the Tavistock, on the failures of feminism! Whilst, simultaneously, facilitating this body hatred with mutilating surgeries!

The paucity of research into psychological underpinnings for the presence of Gender Dysphoria is an international scandal. This is compounded by the failure to follow up those patients who accessed surgical intervention. For me, the moment you advocate for surgery, to resolve a mental health issue, you have failed as a Clinical Psychologist and betrayed your client at their most vulnerable.

This on breast binding. Its the same old bodily hatred that used to be manifested as anorexia. In this country we have official advice to watch out for girls whose families may encourage breast ironing. At the same time corporate enterprise Lush can offer free breast binders as a marketing campaign!

No, Bernadette, you most definitely are not supporting creative expressions of masculinity or femininity. You are telling our gender non-conforming kids they may be born wrong and normalising making yourself a medical patient for life! If you really believe this is what your life’s work was about you are deluded. I would say get some help but where would you go? This is a self-serving justification that reframes the perpetration of extreme harm as necessary and virtuous.

{The Destroy Your Binder video has been removed from YouTube but you can read a transcript on Kat’s Tumbler.}

Destroy Your Binder

Next up Kirsty addresses a response which extols the virtue of a mastectomy for one patient who reports positive feelings about their surgery. This article is not open access but is here:

https://acamh.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/camh.12343

There are many positive accounts on YouTube celebrating getting your, healthy, breasts removed. To which I say “come back in ten years”. I don’t doubt there may be some who never regret this surgery but there are many detransitioners, as related below, who do and others who find it triggers them on to the next set of surgeries; which suggests it was not the panacea they were sold.

Here Ken Zucker uses the word “iatrogenic” for which 👏👏. The social transition of children and its impact on future medicalisation needs researching. Does it foreclose any reconciliation with birth sex? He also rightly comments on the escalating desire for mastectomy which often follows painful breast-binding. He also reports that bodily rejection migrates to the genitals, post mastectomy.

The article ends with

The victims of this modern, mass delusion, are the most vulnerable in our society. Bullied gay youth, girls with eating disorders, autistic kids and kids in local authority care. All groups over-represented at Gender Clinics.

Why has it taken so long to investigate the harms perpetrated primarily on young females in the past decad? The featured image on this post is of a 13 year old girl posing with her surgeon who advertises on TikTok, populated by malleable kids/teens. She calls herself Dr Teetus Deletus to market her services to the youth market.

I do this full-time and have no income. If you want to support my work, and can afford to do so, here is one way.

https://www.paypal.com/paypalme/STILLtish

Researching the impact of Gender Identity Ideology on women & girls as well as the consequences for Lesbians, Gay males and autistic kids. I do this full time and have no income. All my content is open access and donations help keep me going. Only give IF you can afford. Thank you to my generous donors.

£10.00

Detransition Survey: Four

Featured

You can read the full paper below. 👇. This is an excellent piece of work and echoes many of the themes found in the earlier studies I looked at for this series.

This paper is focussed on the support needs of detransitioners but also covers their motivations to both transition and detransition. It also offers a distinction between those who medically detransition and re-identify with their birth sex and those who end any medical treatment but maintain, or perhaps cling, to a trans-identity.

The first point to make is the paper is published in the Journal of Homosexuality!

The location of the publication may, or may not, be a significant development but it gave me significant satisfaction. Below is the abstract for the paper:

First of all it is crucial to determine the definition of a detransitioner. Not all transition medically so first of all the study defines ”social” and ”medical” transition. It is not always the case that people cease to identify as transgender after they stop medical transition. I am also, personally, aware of a post-operative, de-medicalised male who still uses the term ”transsexual” as he feels it best describes his experience. In this case it serves as shorthand to signal the surgery they underwent and also may be a label maintain community links with fellow travellers.

There is some methodological discussion about how a detransitioner is defined. Some data is based on only those who underwent medical interventions. This paper looks at social as well as medical transition but provides research on which medical steps were undertaken by the survey respondents.

For the purposes of this study the author has chosen to focus on those who claimed the label ”detransitioner”. However, they did include 8 people who rejected the label but whose experience was deemed to be sufficiently analogous to include as a ”detransitioner”.

It is also important to note that there are some trans-identified people who feel they have followed an irreversible path. They believe to re-identify with their birth sex is simply not socially, or medically, achievable. I know both males and females, who find themselves in this sort of limbo or no wo/man’s land, if you will. The author is aware of this complexity but it is outside of the scope of this study.

Survey participants were identified by targetting people in on-line forums, where detransitioners were known to seek suport. They were asked a simple question about whether they had ever socially/medically transitioned and stopped. Details of the survey sample are below 👇. As you can see females are over-represented. I suspect this not only a function of the new demographic being predominantly female. It may also be indicative of female openness to seeking community. Perhaps, it also suggests males are less likely to, publicly, admit they made a mistake. Note that males also seem to take longer to find their way back, to their sex, so this pattern may change in the future.

The survey had global reach with majority representation from the United States followed by Europe.

The majority transitioned socially and medically. As this comment reveals there is further complexity in that someone asked about a category for ”Med-trans” only. I assume this is people who didn’t disown their birth sex but did have medical interventions. This may be a niche issue but note that the current WPATH (World Professional Association for Transgender Health ) guidelines have a section on Eunuchs. No I am not kidding!

Below the author delineates the reported experiences revealed by the survey: 51% started socially transitioning under the age of 18. Average age of Medical transition was 20 for females and 26 for males. Brain maturation estimated to occur around age 25. Detransitioners emerging from cohorts who did this at the age of legal majority, the majority, are in danger of being left unprotected in any future which restricts irreversible treatments, in under 18’s.

The sample of males was not large but the age of onset of medical transition mirrors what I have seen on other de-trans surveys. Girls tend to start earlier and spend less time transitioning. Not for the first time, I am struck by how sex matters even in communities which furiously deny the significance of biological sex.

Next up the profile of the respondents. The high % of co-morbidities is also a familiar finding. The rates of surgical interventions is also staggeringly high (46%), especially given the length of time the respondents, particularly, the females, identifed as ”trans”.

The table showing co-morbid conditions lays it out rather starkly. I would have preferred to see sex recorded against these conditions but as the number of males was small it may not have revealed any, statistically, significant differences. Sorry, not sorry, I am wedded to the sex binary. 😉

Now we come to look at reasons for detransition, that are also, inevitably, reveal the reasons for transition. I notice that, in marked contrast to studies funded by Trans Lobby groups, lack of social acceptance/ discrimination scores quite low. A staggering 70% realised their Gender Dysphoria was rooted in other issues.

The kind of support needs the detransitioners identify reflects further on reasons for their initial decision to transition. Many 👇were wrestling with internalised homophobia. See also the comment about a shift in Gender Identity. It is logically incoherent for Trans Activists to argue for the recognition of “Gender Fluidity” whilst defending irreversible interventions for children and adolescents. I am also pleased to see the discovery of radical feminism makes an appearance. It has also appeared in earlier surveys of detransitioners.

The survey also allowed for open comments which I have reproduced in full in part (4 a) to this blog. Well worth giving voice to all the detransitioners who opened up about their experience: You can read their comments here 👇.

Open Comments Detrans Survey 4

The open comments reveal the ostracism, from the LGBT community, experienced by those desisting from the trans-narrative. They also speak of the betrayal and mistrust they now feel towards Medical professionals. The difficulties of finding therapists able to deal with detransition also features in the open comments.

The survey

The survey also provides a helpful table which compares and contrasts the sources of support respondents enjoyed while transitioning and detransitioning. As you can see the LGBT community and trans specific organisations largely leave the scene of the crime; once people realise they made a mistake.

The survey continues to identify the kind of support the respondents would like to be available. These cover psychological, medical, legal and social categories. Counselling to deal with issues such as internalised homophobia, sexism and feelings of regret. Medical support to deal with stopping/changing cross sex hormones or complications from surgeries. Social support covered the need to hear other stories of their fellow travellers and the need to meet up, on-line and in real life.

The legal support mainly related to the need to re-establish their legal identity as their correct sex but a small percentage wished to take legal action for the injuries caused by the medical interventions. 👇 Those of us waiting for legal action, to put an end to this cannot, in my view, expect detransitioners to shoulder this burden. But, if those 13% do take up the legal fight there will be an army provided to support and fundraise for them.

Politicians need to do their jobs and start legislating. They also, in the United States, need to close loopholes relating to Statute limitation. Many live in states where the average length time before detransition means they are already out of time to get any legal redress.

I do this full-time and unwaged. If you can afford to support my work you can do so here.

https://www.paypal.com/paypalme/STILLtish

£10.00

DeTransition: 4th Wave Now (3)

Featured

This post is based on work done by a detranistioner. It was linked to the paper I covered in this post:

Detransition: Cambridge Study (2)

As stated in my earlier pieces getting access to detransitioners requires seeking them out on the social media apps they use. The research was published on Tumblr:

https://guideonragingstars.tumblr.com/post/149877706175/female-detransition-and-reidentification-survey

The work provoked a furious reaction from within the Trans Industrial complex, which you can read about here:

https://4thwavenow.com/2016/09/03/top-gender-doc-dismisses-203-detransitioned-women-as-not-regretters-per-se/

Dan Karasdic likens the work to previous research done by Evangelical Christians and then follows up with a claim the detransitioners were “never really trans”

Judge for yourself.

Methodology:

Cari, the author reached out to people who had desisted from a trans-identity with a survey opened for only two weeks, in 2016, which attracted over 200 responses.

The resulting data garnered some real insight into motivations for a medical transition and subsequent detransition. The survey allowed for the inclusion of people who had ended a medical transition but remained ”trans-identified”. The vast majority identified as female with quite a few rejecting the prefix ”identified” ,as female, to state they simply ”are female”.

This is what the graphic representation illustrates:

For those who did not claim a female identity the breakdown was as follows together with a graph of how they had identified while transitioning. As you can see the majority identified as “trans men” closely followed by “non-binary/gender queer”

The survey also tracked the ages of both embarking on a “transition” and detransitioning: The average age for coming out/starting transition was 17 years old and beginning detransition was aged 21.

The research also looks at what kind of dysphoria the women experienced. The majority reported they had both social and physical (Sex) dysphoria. That is they desired to have, facsimile, male sex characteristics and a desire to be treated as male or, at least, as other than female. This group constituted 74% of the surveyed.

The report goes on to detail that 88% experienced ”sex dysphoria” ; something often denied by those who do not want the topic to be discussed. A claim also rejected by those who argue that detransitioners were never really ”trans” and didn’t have dysphoric feelings.

The research also questioned the particpants about their experience of detransitioning and its impact on their well-being.

The majority found an improvement in their dysphoric feelings after detransition, some reported these feelings had completely gone. There was also a small minority finding their dysphoria had worsened since they began detransitioning.

The survey uncovered some serious concerns about a lack of counselling with a mean duration of less than three months, even for those who did get therapeutic assistance.

Of those undergoing a medical transition the figures for those who had zero counselling was a whopping 65%. These women had no therapy whatsoever before embarking on medical transitions.

Next up the participants were asked what led them to detransition. The top answer was due to political/ideological concerns. The next popular answer was finding an alternative coping strategy. 30% had concerns about their mental health and over one in five reported medical concerns.

The survey provided space for open comments which allowed participants to expand on the reasons for their answers. They were asked to state their position /feelings about their own transition and on the idea of transitioning more generally. The study found participants were generally more negative about their own experience than they were about the idea of transitioning, more generally.

60% were more or less negative about their own experience with a slightly lower percentage more or less negative about transition for other people.

The open comments were revealing. Discovery of radical feminism is mentioned, as a positive, by a few of the participants. Support from Lesbian communities, or lack of such a community is referenced. Some felt they had been pushed into transition. Lack of alternatives presented by therapists also cropped up. Here are some comments on their own transition: Here reports of pressure, feeling duped, crops up. Also one woman feels she has so altered her body with hormones, mastectomy and hysterectomy she feels as if she is no longer allowed to identify as a woman, or a man.

More comments about the lack of exploratory therapy, inaccurate information from trans-activists, no effort made to consider non-medical responses to Gender Dysphoria recurred. The therapeutic community has a lot to answer for, in respect of this unfolding medical scandal.

More comments reference the need for a stronger community for Lesbian and bisexual women. Even among the detransitioners there is still a belief in Gender Identity Ideology /Queer Theory and one also remains in a relarionship with a ”Trans man” who remains on a medical pathway. Only some are critical of medical pathways more generally, but the majority express the need for careful consideration and more therapy.

One respondent succintly states :”Burn every gender clinic down”. Many also express concern about children and teenagers put on a medicalised pathway. Lack of attention to trauma, underlying a flight from being female, is also a recurrent theme, as is the lack of accurate information from the trans community and medical professionals.

More than one respondent likens the transitioning of children and young people as a from of conversion therapy. The expressions of anger at those who colluded with this are surprisingly muted. Many seem to blame themselves but one, rather poignantly, wishes people, had been honest rather than encouraging her down this path. A few respondents do, however, blame queer theory or the trans-medical system. In general they show compassion for those who continue on this path or are about to embark on medical intervention.

I firmly believe the poster who calls this “medical recklessness” will be vindicated. Dan may rue the day he dismissed these findings. 👇

I do this work full-time and unwaged. If you can afford to support my work you can do so here: 👇

https://www.paypal.com/paypalme/STILLtish

£10.00

British Psychological Society 5

Featured

DISSENTING VOICES.

https://thepsychologist.bps.org.uk/volume-33/october-2020/freedom-expression-around-diversity-guidelines

A letter in response to the guidelines. Reproduced, in full, below.

Freedom of expression around diversity guidelines

Numerous psychologists call for review of the BPS Guidelines for Psychologists Working with Gender, Sexuality and Relationship Diversity; plus response.

Following the response to J.K. Rowling’s essay ‘Reasons for Speaking Out on Sex and Gender Issues’ and the 18 June Newsnight report of safeguarding concerns at the NHS Gender Identity Development Service, we call for an immediate review of the recent BPS Guidelines for Psychologists Working with Gender, Sexuality and Relationship Diversity (BPS, 2019).

These guidelines state that a ‘gender-affirmative’ stance should be the default position adopted by psychologists. We are concerned that the instruction to ‘integrat[e] an affirmative stance into their model of practice’ restricts the use of many core models (systemic, trauma-informed, developmental) in formulating the factors resulting in the clients’ presentation. This places limitations on researchers and practitioners exploring the wider context of ‘gender’ and seeking to establish ‘best-evidence’ for the support of individuals with gender dysphoria.

For those unfamiliar with the guidance or discussion in this field, ‘gender affirming’ practice calls for psychologists to work on the basis that an individual’s belief in self-ascribed gender is ‘valid and legitimate’. We hope all psychologists value and respect the varied understandings that people hold of the world around them and of their personal experience. We suggest it is possible to value and respect a client’s experience, without taking a position of affirmation. Indeed we often do this within our work with various client groups. The BPS guidance stipulates that practitioners validate a belief in gender (both in general and in particular to the individual’s sense of self) without considering the evidence base in relation to the practice of belief validation.

Individuals who are questioning their identity with respect to their sex and gender clearly report significant levels of psychological distress. The long-term implications for this population resulting from the provision or denial of access to treatment are substantial. We recognise that appropriate, evidence-based guidelines are imperative to support the skilled psychological practice which our profession seeks to uphold. However, such guidelines can only be effective when these are the result of comprehensive research, conducted in an environment that supports free and independent enquiry.

In particular, we think it is imperative that psychologists are not prevented from using our core professional skill of formulation, exploring the origins and nature of distress rather than ascribing to one pre-determined ‘diagnosis’ or explanation. With other presentations we are in agreement that there are multiple contributory factors to psychological distress. It is only from this exploration that we can develop individualised formulations to guide our attempts to alleviate that distress. We think the current guidelines effectively prohibit psychologists from taking a questioning approach and applying ethical practice in these situations. The absence of a robust evidence base supporting psychological and medical intervention is a concern in this rapidly growing population, leaving significant gaps in our understanding of many relevant issues. The disproportionate increase in presentations of females to services, the phenomenon of so-called Rapid-Onset Gender Dysphoria, the voices of individuals who have desisted or detransitioned, and the experiences of those for whom existing treatments have been of value must all be addressed in the search for quality research informing best-evidence practice. Such research can only be conducted in an environment that is open to discussion in a respectful and professionally inquisitive manner.

We would like to see the current guidance withdrawn and the topic reviewed afresh in accordance with the rules of proper intellectual inquiry: the weighing up of evidence; the ethical considerations of psychological practice; and the avoidance at all times of ad hominem forms of argument. Some of the signatories below, with others, have submitted a formal request for the withdrawal of the guidance to the Society. We hope that readers will support our expectation that the freedom of expression of all psychologists will be defended, unambiguously and at all times, in relation to both research and practice.

SIGNATORIES. (Some names are witheld)

Dr Katie Alcock (Senior Lecturer in Psychology)

Rachel Corry (Occupational Psychologist)

Ms Nina Gadsdon (Psychology Masters Student)

Dr Louise Fernandes (Clinical Psychologist)

Ms Pat Harvey (Guinan) (Former Chair of the Division of Clinical Psychology)

Dr Peter Harvey (Former Chair of the Division of Clinical Psychology)

Mr Ian Hancock (Retired Consultant Clinical Psychologist, Director of Psychological Services, NHS Dumfries and Galloway).

Dr John Higgon (Consultant Clinical Neuropsychologist)

Dr Anna Hutchinson (Clinical Psychologist)

Dr Gill I’Anson (Consultant Clinical Psychologist)

Mr Eric Karas (Retired Consultant Clinical Psychologist)

Dr Jeanie McIntee (Consultant Clinical & Forensic Psychologist & Psychotherapist)

Dr David Pilgrim (Former Chair of the History and Philosophy Section)

Julia Richards (Educational Psychologist)

Cas Schneider (Consultant Chartered Clinical Psychologist)

Karen Scott (Retired Educational Psychologist)

Dr Sarah Verity (Chartered Clinical Psychologist)

Dr Robert Watts (Clinical Psychologist)

Anne Woodhouse (Clinical Psychologist)

Colleagues who felt they needed to remain anonymous:

Consultant Clinical Psychologist NE England

Clinical Psychologist NE England

Consultant Forensic Psychologist S England

Clinical Psychologist NW England

BPS RESPONSE TO THE LETTER

Society response: We acknowledge that the BPS is a broad church, and there will always be differing views among our members on some issues. We are confident that our guidelines are based on the best current evidence and research in this important area, having been developed by experts working in the field. Clearly we share your concern about the safeguarding of children and young people, but our guidance is specifically for the care and treatment of adults, not children.

The draft guidance was sent out for Society-wide consultation on 19 March 2019. It was also sent to the Royal College of Psychiatrists, APA, BACP, BABCP, UKCP, Stonewall, LGBT foundation and COSRT for comment. At the close of the consultation on 12 April 2019 34 responses had been received. Just one of these responses mentions the issue of dissenting voices that is raised in your letter. This respondent also stated that the document was ‘well intentioned and positive’.

All our guidance is periodically reviewed. This particular guidance is the second version, having been revised in 2019. If there is a change in practice or evidence, then the need to revise the guidance would be established. In this instance, we will review the guidance if there are implications for the care and treatment of adults following the outcomes of:

the judicial review regarding the use of hormone blockers in child services on grounds of capacity to consent
NHS’s Independent review of puberty suppressants and cross sex hormones
NICE review of the latest clinical evidence.

As a Society we are committed to our members having a view and welcome different perspectives. As such any revised guidance will be sent out for Society-wide consultation and we would welcome your input into the revised consultation process.View the complete article as a PDF document
(Please note that some pictures may have been removed for copyright reasons)

If you are able to support my work please do so. I am unwaged and all my content is open.

Investigating the march of Gender Identity Ideology. The impact on Women’s rights and the cost paid by our Gay offspring & children on the Autistic spectrum.

£5.00

British Psychological Society 4

Featured

This is part 4 of a series on the British Psychological Society. This blog will examine the BPS treatment guidelines, from 2019. The 2012 version is covered in part three. The changes between the two versions are indicative of the level of mission creep. Unless otherwise indicated, all quotations are taken from this document. 👇

Guidelines for psychologists working with gender, sexuality and relationship diversity

Part One

In Part One I looked at the background to a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) that commits a number of organisations to reject Conversion Therapy

Part Two

In Part Two I looked at the BPS position statement, on therapy pertaining to sexual orientation, and examined the profiles of the authors.

Part Three

Part Three looks in detail at the recommended treatment guidelines and illustrates how far they stray from the impression given by the position statement.

Part 4 : The 2019 guidelines.

The authors/contributors.

The same names are involved, as were acknowledged in the 2012 version. You can find out more about some of these names in earlier parts of this series. Stonewall UK are also thanked for their help.

What changed in the new Guidelines?

Gone are the warnings that caution is required before any irreversible medical treatments Ditto concern about the impact of Schizophrenia, or Aspergers, on Gender Identity Issues. The fact that most children/teens, with Gender Identity issues, will, turn out to be mainly Gay males and Lesbians has also disappeared. Why? What has changed?

What has survived are the ideas around Sexual Identities / sexual practices.

⇐ Here we see that the guidelines encompass gender, sexuality and those with diverse relationships. The phrase “assigned at birth“ is used, an ideological formulation to suggest it is not obvious in 99.9% of cases. Also “Cisgender”; another, contested, term claiming anyone comfortable with their biological sex is in fact content with their “gender”. As many of us point out, ad nauseum, accepting your biological sex does not mean you are comfortable with “gender” ! Especially since any definition of “gender” seems to be the based entirely on reductive sex stereotypes.

Moving on, here is a full list of what the BPS includes under “diverse relationship/sexual practices”. A veritable, word salad of queer theory inspired, nonsense.

⇒

The practice of BDSM is culturally specific and hardly a biologically determined part of sexuality. The claim this is all part of “human diversity” strongly implies all these “identities” have been with us since the dawn of time. A categorical falsehood which only survives by a historical revisionism, deployed by Trans Activists, which shames Stalin. Anybody who confirms that women,and men, have always rejected the constraints of expected gender roles is simply retrospectively transed.

Membes are instructed on use of ⇒ ⇒⇒ preferred pronouns and warned not to stigmatise diverse sexual practices. Polite pronoun use is one thing, however, the use of “expect” and “correct” smacks of compelled speech and underlines how authoritarian this movement is.

The dismissal of emotional problems and suicide attempts from this client group also seems dangerously lacking in curiosity, or research, into post-transition suicidality. ⇓

Minority stress is undoubtedly an issue for Gay and Transsexual/Transgender clientele. I think it is over-stating the case to dismiss all of these co-morbidities as arising from lack of social acceptance. Some victims of sexual abuse locate their involvment, in BDSM, as a response to these experiences or even how the abuse manifested itself. Some women talk of their involvment in sadomasochistic practices as arising from/causing negative impacts on their mental health and self-esteem. Some transsexuals refer to the mental stress of “imposter syndrome” and the relief garnered from naming, and accepting, their biological sex. The thinking underpinning these guidelines seems to prioritise an ideology rather than centre the client’s well-being. Sweeping all of these identities, sexual practices and relationship types into the prohibition of “conversion therapy” may deny therapeutic help to vulnerable groups. Not analysing underlying /subconcious motivations seems reckless. Yet, the BPS do exactly that: ⇓

Who is covered by the prohibition of Conversion Therapy?

Autogynephilia & Fetishistic Tranvestism

It is also significant that all reference to fetishistic transvestism has disappeared from this edition of the guidelines. Another notable, I would also argue tactical, omission is the phenomenon of Autogynephilia (AGP). This is a paraphilia and affects heterosexual men. The clinical description is that they have an “erotic target location error” and are aroused by the idea of themselves “as a woman”. An AGP male can derive satisfaction, sometimes overtly sexual, from invading female spaces. Is it any wonder that activists do not wish to draw attention to this type of transsexualism/transgender identity?

Here there is a brief mention of the mental health conditions which may play a role in a particular “identity”. This document is very keen to badge these as “extremely rare”.

Notice the shaming tactic of inferring any dissent is akin to racism.

The omission of the paragraph below, from the 2012 guidelines, is more transgender washing. Most people have no idea about autogynephilia, yet it is paraphilia documented for decades. It is also a condition for which men have sought treatment, rather than “transiton” . This begs the question of where they get this help when therapists simply affirm a trans identity.. This is also a tactical omission because acknowledging men adopting women’s clothing/identity, for erotic purposes, isn’t good public relations . Telling the general public, men with a sexual a paraphilia can safely be given to access women’s spaces won’t be appearing on David Lammy’s campaign literature any time soon. (Lammy is the UK, MP responsible for the passage of the Gender Recognition Act)

Too many policy makers are treating any male with a Cross-Sex Identity as if it magically transforms them, literally, into their chosen “identity”. This matters because we treat men, as a class, a certain way becauuse of the the statistical sexual offending rate against women.. There is no evidence this, changes “post transition” whatever that means no we are told it is transphobiv to expect a penectomy has been performed. In fact it sex offenders may, in fact, by higher judging my the males in the UK prison population. Moreover our politicians would know this if they had bothered to undertake any impact assessments. Instead they have shown a feckless disregard for women’s rights.

Social Engineering.

Gender Identity Ideology has gained such traction by the take over of bodies responsible for making policy and laws. Here the BPS calls for its members to become active in policy making and their community to “effect change” . The wholesale social engineering necessary to make organistations afraid to use the word “woman” dopt a whole new (dehumanising) language to describe us is not happenstance. Its indicative of institutional capture.

For emphasis I am including this next paragraph, even thought it is somewhat repeat some earlier points. Here the mandated belief is that sexual attraction operates based on “gender identity”. The wording is, I would argue, deliberately obfuscatory so it is not readily apparent that the BPS are actually de-coupling sexual orientation from sex. We have already been told that a male-sexed, and male-presenting person, can be a lesbian. Shouldn’t a therapist be able to explore what has given rise to this belief, because it is patently delusional. Is it ethicaly to endorse the boundary breaching this entails for the old fashioned kind of Lesbian. AKA WOMEN!

Below it is made explicit that no assumptions should be made about any medical interventions required, or undertaken. Once again, for emphasis, this is why more and more Lesbians and Gay males are starting to sound the alarm for what this means for their exclusive same sex orientation. This ideology parrots the idea that being “exclusive” in your, same sex, dating practices is “transphobic”. Does the BPS agree with this? What does this say about the legally protected characterisic of sexual orientation?

If you have not yet acquainted yourself with the idea of “Lady Penis” then now is the time because it is being taught in primary schools. See my blog below.

That is right. Your children are being taught that some girls have a penis.

This paragraph is also worth reproducing to the maximum size possible. Basically if an obvious man, who belongs to the male sex, tells you that he is, nevertheless, a lesbian it is your duty to accept this. Then again he may wish you to call him “slut” . This immediately makes me wish I knew the relative price comparison for a session with a psychologist versus say, a dominatrix.

Yep. I went there. Being call “slut” by a dominatrix is big in “femdom” and sissy porn. Website below takes you to a content warning that it is only suitable for over 18’s. You can get the drift from the promotional blurb.

https://miss-kimberley.co.uk/

Here is a review: {I had better not be involved in a crime BTW as my search history….}

Ths next paragraph I believe is referred to as a bait and switch. There is growing evidence of the abuse, of female partners, by trans-identified males with Autogynephilia. However this document emphasises that a transitioning partner should not feel inhibited in complaining about an accepting partner. I imagine this excerpt will draw a rueful grimace from transwidows. This excerpt also inverts the power dynamics in a relationship where only one is non-monogamous or practices BDSM. These two “identities”, it is implied, will be the marginalised/oppressed. Thus, in one fell swoop, the woman with a partner who has sex outside the relationship, or pays to visit a Mistress Kimberley, will be deemed at the losing end of a power differential with his partner. This is gaslighting in a gimp mask.

Finally. In the previous version of the guidelines much more time was given to the potential implications of irreversible medical interventions on children/teens. In this version we are simply told that “reproductive optiions…may be more complex”.

I have lost count of the times I have been flat out contradicted for saying we are sterilising kids when we put children on puberty blockers. We are. When you put children, as young as 10, on puberty blockers they invariably progress to cross sex hormones. They will be infertile. We are doing this in the UK.

Finally in my next blog I will make it clear there is opposition/concern within the ranks of BPS members.

Next up: THE 2019 guidance and some dissenting voices from within the BPS membership.

If you are able to support my work please do so. I am unwaged and all my content is open.

Investigating the march of Gender Identity Ideology. The impact on Women’s rights and the cost paid by our Gay offspring & children on the Autistic spectrum.

£5.00

British Psychological Society 3

Featured

This is part 3 of a series on the British Psychological Society. This blog will examine the BPS treatment guidelines, referenced in the BPS position statement, covered in Part Two. Unless otherwise indicated, all quotations are taken from this document. 👇

Guidelines and Literature Review for Psychologists Working Therapeutically with Sexual and Gender Minority Clients (2012)

Part One

In Part One I looked at the background to a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) that commits a number of organisations to reject Conversion Therapy. The concern I have is the MOU to oppose “conversion therapy” includes both Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity. An unintended consequence is gay males and lesbians may be placed on an unnecessary medicalised pathway to “transition”. Ironically this is actually a form of Gay Conversion. Therapists should be able to prioritise reconciliation to biological sex/sexuality as the ideal outcome. Same sex orientation doesn’t involve lifetime dependence on cross-sex hormones/surgery. This MOU effectively bans therapists / parents from affirming biological sex and sexuality.

In Part Two I looked at the BPS position statement, on therapy pertaining to sexual orientation, and examined the profiles of the authors. The BPS statement mentions “gender identity” only in passing, yet the full guidelines centre Gender Identity issues as much as sexual orientation. This has all the hall marks of yet more “stealth” activism.

Part Two

Part Three looks in detail at the recommended treatment guidelines and illustrates how far they stray from the impression given by the position statement. Even the title deviates from a focus on Sexual Orientation: “Psychologists working therapautically with Sexual and Gender Minority Clients”.

Unsuprisingly some prominent people from the UK main Gender Identity Clinic / Trans Activists were involved. ⇓

Christina Richards is employed at the Gender Identity Clinic (GIDs) sometimes, informally, referred to as the Tavistock. You can read about Christina here. Richards has a very high profile in the field of Gender Identity and especially in organisations which promote an “affirmation only” approach to Gender Dysphoria. :https://christinarichardspsychologist.wordpress.com/

Christina may also be remembered for defending a job advert which sought to recruit more people to work at GIDs and included this memorable part of the selection criteria:

Polly Carmichael is the director of the Gender Identity Service (GIDs) as I write. Penny Lenihan is also a psychotherapist based at GIDs. Meg Barker (now Meg-John) is an activist who campaigns on Bisexual issues and was the author of a bat-shit crazy document for the BACP (British Association of Counsellors and Psychotherapists). She campaigns for the recognition of those practicing BDSM/Kink /polyamorous relationships. Meg also thinks Bi-sexuals are stigmatised by the assumption that they are involved in diverse sexual practices. She/He/They/Zie (who the hell knows/cares?) states that the “bi” in “bisexual” is problematic as it suggests there are only two genders. Of course, sexual orientation is described, as same gender attraction which, as we now know, is not synonymous with biological sex. This has the effect of undermining Same-Sexual Orientation. (See later definition of “lesbian”)

Note also contributor Christine Burns, a prominent Trans Activist and editor of a collection of essays, in the book “Trans Britain”. Also Stephen Whittle, who obtained law qualifications, to better advocate for trans rights. These two names crop up numerous times, both are “trans”

Sexual Identities.

Here is a flavour of what the authors mean by “sexual identities”. It is not, as you may have expected, a reference to different sexual orientations. It includes sexual practices such as sado-masochism, transvestism as well as the more benign sounding asexuality.

The BPS document is very clear it includes “Fetishistic Transvestism” as shown by the quote below. Bear in mind that transvestites, now referred to as part-time cross-dressers, are officially under the Trans Umbrella, according to Stonewall UK. I wonder if this definition will appear in the 2019 version of this document? The protection of “sexual minorities” is now extended to people with a paraphilia, and by people I mean men. Remember this when you tweet out vacous statements about supporting people to “live as their authentic self”. I am pretty sure most people don’t realise this is what we are being asked to sign up to…. Did the MOU signatories?

Here we are reassured that not all of the cross dressing men, now officially transgender, are fetishistic. Once again women cry: “How do we know which one’s?”. Remember single sex spaces are not because all men are predators but because a minority are. The same applies to men. who identify as transgender. How do we know which part of the umbrella they come under? Too many policy makers are treating any male with a Cross-Sex Identity as identifying as if this magically transforms the statistical sexual offending profile to literally equate to that of natal (for emphasis only) women. There is no evidence of this, quite the contrary.

BDSM (Bondage, Discipline, Sadism & Masochism).

Another aspect of Gender Identity Ideology is the integral notion of power relations between “genders”. The notions of dominance and submission are necessary for sexual power games. The only subversion here is sometimes the sexes get to “play” different roles. The hierarchy remains intact but, gender identity ideologues argue, this somehow undermines “gendered expectations” and liberates us all! BDSM normalises the notion of pain, submission and servitude. To get an idea of just how liberating this has been, for women, find me a man who has died at the hands of a woman who then used then used the “rough sex” defence to avoid prison. Doesn’t happen.

To get a further idea of just how regressive this is let me quote an excerpt from a Master’s thesis. It was written by a man who documented how BDSM helped cement his identity as a transwoman. He had an unpleasant, sexual, encounter where his safe words were disregarded by the other participant. This is what he took away from that encounter:

“Sex Work”.

Naturally Queer Theory proponents avoid the unpleasant truth about prostituted women. Despite the fact clients are practically always men and the percentage of male prostitutes, also servicing men, are dwarfed in comparision to the females. The clinicians are warned about pathologising issues such as sex addction and pornography use.

In an outbreak of honesty they do, briefly, acknowledge there is a body of work (See Gail Dines) on the objectification of women in pornography.

The centrality of pro-prositution arguments within Trans-Activist ideology is indicated by the two slurs used against women, who question this belief system. These are Swerf and Terf, acronyms for Sex Worker/Trans Excusionary Radical Feminists. Some radical feminists are ex prostituted women who remain deeply concerned for the women who remain in prostitution. Others are opponents of the sale of women’s bodies and care deeply about the women labelled “sex workers”. Here the BPS pay lip service to the women who need an “exit strategy” . (What work requires an exit strategy?) but shamefully tries a “bad on both sides” argument re the perpetrators of violence. Even worse it suggests the “sex workers” need a route to empowerment and to learn to be assertive. Shame on everyone who agreed with this paragraph.

The centrality of pro-prostitution narratives is striking in prominent Trans activists and Celebrities. Janet Mock saw prostitution as a good way to validate their “womanhood”. Mock even compared prostitution to the underground railway that enabled Black people to escape the South and Slavery. Seeking male validation of your womanhood, via prostitution, runs counter to feminist campaigns to reject our commodification/ objectification. Yet another example where the “feminist” agenda of ,self-described, Transwomen, actually undermines women’s position in society. It is almost as if the interests of the new kind of women are perfectly in tune with men’s rights and diametrcally opposed to the interests of women.

I have seen many sad stories about gay males entering prostitution to fund their flight from their sex and sexuality. I have not seen any voices expressing concern about the rate of prostituted males killed in countries like Brazil. We see lots of concern about the deaths of transwomen but very little acknowledgment that their deaths are related to the prostitution industry which has a a high rate of violence and death. Not so much empowering but devouring this demographic. Clients are overwhelmingly men despite the attempt to pretend there is a high demand from women. I think the Chicks with Dicks phenomenon is likely near as dammit 100% male.

I include this quote just to note that the theme of Lesbians changing their orientation is recurrent.

Cultural appropriation: Lesbians

Here the BPS gives the word “lesbian” to males, who present as male, but describe themselves as “lesbian”. To all those people denying this is actually happening. Here is yet more confirmation.

The BPS also endorse the idea that sexuality is fluid. While there are complex debates around whether sexuality is innate and unchanging one of the key victories in Gay Rights movement was that their sexuality was fixed and therefore Conversion Therapy should not be attempted, and moreover, it won’t work. However this doesn’t chime with the idea that a Lesbian can express their sexuality with a male-bodied “lesbian”. Is this why the idea of a fluid sexuality has gained ground in advocates of Queer Theory?

Gender Performance.

Here the BPS explains that an absence of socialisation related to your preferred gender may mean that trans people have difficulty with their “gender performance”. That may explain the lingering male socialisation that generates so many woman-identified people threatening women with their male genitalia. Very interesting use of the word “performance” here. Performative femininity is something feminists have sought to resist and reject illustrating, once again, that it runs counter to women’s liberation for our sex to be reduced to simply an “identity”.

I would love to see some research about the long term mental health impact of pretending to be something you are not. The Imposter Syndrome must be debilitating and I cannot imagine it is psychologically healthy.

Therapy or Social Engineering?

Another interesting observation below. Yes! There are people who are fine with all sorts of personal self-expression and not conforming to expected sex stereotypes should be supported. The next sentence is fascinating. Ideologues insist that young people should be encouraged in this, regardless of personal cost, because it aids the “deconstitution of the gender binary”. That doesn’t read like a careful, therapeutic approach to clients with “Gender Dysphoria”. It reads as an appeal to harness them as activists for a wider project of social engineering. Is that even ethical?

Medical Interventions for Gender Confusion.

The quote below contains an important acknowledgment of research which highlights that the majority of “gender atypical” youth will be young gay males/lesbians. It also stresses the it is “imperative irreversible medical decisions should not be made“. This document is therefore not reflective of a purely affirmative model and thus gives contradictory messages. It is also interesting this comment survived the edit , though the BPS go on to advocate stopping puberty and early surgery. How clinicians were supposed to navigate these mixed messages is a mystery to me.

The document also raises some concerns which are echoed by those of us concerned about the impact of Gender Identity ideology on gay males and Lesbians. Here Clinicians are warned about the cultural context surrounding sex stereotypes. They raise the issue of father’s who may be concerned that they have a “sissy” for a son, we could call this homophobia. Again they also highlight that the majority of pre-pubertal children desist and later identify as gay or bisexual. I will be very surprised if this survives the BPS guidelines for 2019.

Furthermore it goes on to acknowledge the treatment for Gender Identity Disorder (previous name for Gender Dysphoria) is “experimental”. Note that by 2011 GIDS had already begun blocking puberty for children as young as 10. A decade later they still have not published the research outcomes from that “Study” ,despite being obliged to do so. I use inverted commas here because I am not the only one who feels this “study” was a pretext for embarking on the early medicalisation of gender confused kids/teens. We are starting to see some of the fall-out from this approach in the emerging phenomena of de-transitioners.

Another series of startling admissions echo the experience of parents dealing with our Gender Dysphoric kids/teens. Clinicians are warned that an obsession with changing sex may arise due to schizophrenia or Asperger’s syndrome. They also warn about the role of the internet in fostering a trans-identity. Furthermoe they caution people of the consquences of advising people who you do not really “know”. Anyone who has visited the Trans related subreddits will see that this sort of “coaching” is a regular feature of that forum.

Even more worrying is the growth of on-line Gender Identity services who are facilitating the dispensing of hormone treatment. These operate on the “informed Consent” model which basically hands the treatment decisions to their “clients”. Basically these practioners discourage any gatekeeping (caution) and agree that a “Trans” person knows their gender identity best. It is therefore the role of the clinician to “affirm” not “question ” a client’s Gender dentity. The caution expressed below seems to have all but disappeared in modern practice.

Below they highlight that trans individuals may “embellish or limit personal history information in order to obtain desired treatments”. Parents are well aware that our offspring re-invent the past and, in my opinion, this is one reason why we are demonised and sidelined. When our offspring claim to have always felt like the opposite sex we are the people who can offer a counter-narrative based on facts.

Here they present a list of the surgeries that may be on the list to enable people to “live as their authentic self”.

Next up: THE 2019 guidance and some dissenting voices from within the BPS membership.

If you are able to support my work please do so. I am unwaged and all my content is open.

Investigating the march of Gender Identity Ideology. The impact on Women’s rights and the cost paid by our Gay offspring & children on the Autistic spectrum.

£5.00

British Psychological Society 2

Featured

For the purposes of this blog I am interested in how the British Psychological Society (BPS) came to draft the Memorandum Of Understanding (MOU) outlawing the practice of Conversion Therapy. I have revisited their pronouncements from 2012 to trace what led up to the BPS stance. First I looked at the summary document which doesn’t give much away. You can read this here: 👇

BPS Positions Statement on Therapies Attempting to Change Sexual Orientation (2013)

This document is dated December 2012 and it’s title is reassuring. Clear statement that the BPS is concerned with Sexual Orientation. No conflation of sexual orientation with Gender Identity.

Indeed the short document is focussed almost entirely on opposing conversion (sometimes referred to, sinisterly, as “reparative”) therapies relating to sexual orientation. Only this one sentence references “Gender Identities”.

If I had read only this position statement I would have assumed the BPS were still talking about Gay Conversion Therapy. If I was a stealth advocate of Gender Identity Ideology the above quote provides enough “plausible deniability” against accusations of duplicity. The authors can argue they referenced gender/identities in the summary document. Anyone not versed in Trans rhetoric, (who was in 2012?) would not have picked up the reference to “gender” and “identities” or the wider implications. I wonder how many BPS members read the full document to which they refer?

The authors allude to a 100 page guidance which sets out, in detail, the expected treatment guidelines that Therapists are expected to follow. If you didn’t go on to read this document you would be unaware of what you were actually signing up to…

I will cover the above document, in detail, in my next blog. First I want to have a look at the people, publicly, involved in producing the BPS position statement. If I have learned anything, from my deep dives into Transgender Ideology, it is that the same names recur. It is chilling because a tiny minority of activists have managed an astonishing level of cognitive and legal/policy capture.

Here are the named contributors to the BPS position statement.

Dr Lyndsey Moon (Chair)

Here is a profile of Dr Moon which makes it clear their interest in Queer Theory pre-dates this position statement by many years. https://www.beeleaf.com/beeleaf-team/igi-lyndsey-moon/

Here Dr Lydsey is referenced in relation to a meeting with the Government Equality Office, in July 2019. Note their attendance was by invitation of the GEO.

Below is the website which details the meeting with the GEO and also introduces another group : Psychotherapists and Counsellors for Social Responsibility (PCSR). Well worth reading this because they report that they felt “heard” and clearly have on-going contact with senior figures within the Government Equality Office.

https://www.pcsr.org.uk/resources/13

The link above also provides full details of the LGBT Advisory Panel to the GEO. Note the name of Dr Michael Brady LGBT advisor. The panel of LGBT advisors which includes Ruth Hunt (then CEO of Stonewall), Paul Dillane of the Kaleidescope Trust and Paul Martin of Consortium. This LGBT panel was expanded in membership later and included James Morton of Scottish Trans Alliance. The LGBT Advisory panel, to the GEO, is also crying out for a full analysis of it’s compositon and its activities.

By August 2020 Dr Moon appears to have a multiple identity as Dr Igi/Lyndsey Moon. Here she/he/they (who knows?) speaks fluent Gender Identity speak encompassing the gender fluid, the non-binary and their right to equal treatment (fair enough). The group also campaign for these identited to be protected from “conversion” therapy. Most people are aware of the shameful history of Conversion attempts of homosexuals. The literature on conversion attempts of the “Gender Fluid” and “non-binary” community is something with which I am much less familiar.

Dr Moon is also now the chair of this organisation to campaign against conversion therapy:

Dr H. Eli Joubert

Dr Joubert is another author who works in the field of Gender Dysphoria/Transsexualism. He provides diagnostic services to enable access to HRT (cross sex hormones) and surgeries. He also provides documentation to support applications for a Gender Recognition Certificate. He has also worked with Transgender prisoners. He is deeply entrenched in the Gender Medico-Industrial Complex.

Dr Claudio Pestano

Dr Pestano works in the field of Gender Dysphoria though his main focus seems to be Aspergers/Autism.

Estimates of the percentage of referrals to Gender Identity Clinics, with a diagnosis of Autism are up to 30%. Females with autism are less likely to have a diagnosis so the prevalence of diagnosed females, in Gender Identity Referrals, should raise alarm bells. Dr Postano may very well be aware of this and his therapy may be perfectly appropriate. I would, however, like to see more experts on autism raising some concern about why so many autistic kids are identifying as “transgender”.

Dr Joanna Semlyen

You can watch Dr Joanna Semlyen and Dr Moon speaking to parliament on LBGT mental health in May 2019. In it you will find references to Bridging hormones which is the practice of providing cross-sex hormones to those on the waiting list for Gender Identity Clinics. Lots of references to hetero-normative, different identities, non-binary, gender fluid etc. Dr Semlyen makes a plea for the inclusion of gender identity and sexual orientation in databases to make LGBTQ+ people feel confident in their acceptance. It’s not clear if Dr Semlyen advocates for sex to be replaced with “gender identity” but we now know this is already happening. The other panel member says acceptance is not enough. People with different identities should not be simply accepted they should be celebrated. One of the contributors is quoted saying the following: “LGBTQ identities should be very highly valued, not just equal, not just part of the mainstream, but much more valued”. It’s almost as if they have no concerns that they may be fuelling a backlash against the communities they purport to serve.

You can watch this session below and read the full transcript of the evidence. All via Hansard.

Oral Evidence

Or read the transcript Oral evidence – Health and social care and LGBT communities – 15 May 2019

Notice that Sarah Champion makes every effort to make sure the topic of trans suicides comes up. Suicide Ideation / attempts crops up frequently in this “debate” using statistics which have been debunked many times. I mention this because Sarah Champion has been challenged , my myself and others, due to her use of suicide statistics which inflate the risk to transgender teens. I wish politicians would do some due diligence and pay attention to Samaritan’s guidance on responsible coverage of suicide risk. I cover this here: Suicide in the Trans Community

Gay/Gender Identity: Conversion Therapy

Most people will, instinctively, wish to see Gay Conversion Therapy banned. Lobby groups know this so they are using stealth tactics to bolt on “Gender Identity ” to a popular cause. As I have argued, consistently, this legitimises the new Woke Gay Conversion Therapy. Activists argue that failing to adhere to sex stereotypes may mean you are born in the wrong body. Non-adherence to sex stereotypes is common, especially in Gay males and Lesbians. One from the rise outcome of Gender Identity Ideology is Lesbians and Gay males are, once again, hearing “born wrong” narratives dressed up in a rainbow costume.

This forced teaming, of the T ,with the LGB, has proved a disaster for homosexuals. in so many ways. Gender Identity Ideology threatens to undo the many victories of Gay Right’s activists In The Denton’s Document, Lobbyists for Gender Identity legislation are encouraged to latch onto popular legislation to sneak in further entrenchment of Gender Identity Ideology. Gay Conversion Therapy bans, which include “gender identity“, are no exception. I will link my piece on the Denton’s document here, Everybody should read it, 👇

That Denton’s Document

In this blog I am simply looking at the BPS position statement. I will follow this up with the a look at detailed guidance to which we are signposted. It is over 100 pages long in this edition and this article gives you a good idea of the kind of content you can look forward to from the BPS……

https://quillette.com/2020/10/31/i-signed-up-to-study-sexual-health-what-i-got-was-gender-ideology-fetishism-and-porn/

To avoid transmission of the POMO virus please wear a Mask?

British Psychological Society 1

For the purposes of this blog I am interested in how the British Psychological Society (BPS) came to draft this Memorandum Of Understanding (MOU) outlawing the practice of Conversion Therapy. I imagine most people will, instinctively, see this as an unmitigated good but beware. As I have written in my blog below stealth tactics are in play. This is not just about Gay Conversion Therapy. it also includes “Gender Identity” which makes it a very different proposition. This is a tactic. See my post on The Activist’s play book below:

That Denton’s Document

Activists are encouraged to latch onto popular legislation to sneak in further entrenchment of Gender Identity Ideology. Gay Conversion Therapy bans, which include “gender identity“, are no exception.

Here I am simply looking at the MOU but I will follow up with blog on the BPS guidelines, referenced in this document. 👇

memorandum-of-understanding-v2-reva-jul19

First up a definition 👇 as provided, in the MOU, which you can read below

For regular readers you will know my concern is “affirming” a Gender Identity, at odds with your biological sex, may very well be a form of Gay Conversion Therapy. I cover this below.

The Woke Gay Conversion Therapy?

The BPS sets out its stance in this document. Sexual orientation is defined such that anyone whose “Gender Identity” is at odds with their biological sex is not excluded from the target of their sexual orientation. It paves the way for male lesbians and female gay men. It also includes asexual as a sexual orientation which is starting to become more prevalent in communications from the likes of Stonewall U.K. (For overseas readers Stonewall is a UK organisation which, historically, fought for Gay rights). The BPS also have signed up to the belief that sex isn’t binary despite the fact that we are a sexually dimorphic species. Sigh!

Next, clip below, BPS members are told they are not allowed to favour any Gender Identity over another. The language is obfuscatory. The BPS doesn’t support therapeutic approaches to reconcile a child /youth to a Gender Identity that aligns with their biological sex.The BPS effectively supports only a Gender Identity at odds with biological sex. How else will they disrupt the Gender Binary and queer social norms? Queering society turns out to have meant straightening the Gays. Who knew?

It is my, unashamed, preference that my son reconciles to his sex and sexuality. In an ideal world our offspring will live a full life, in their sexed body, with whichever sex forms the basis of their attraction. This means they won’t depend on cross sex hormones, for the rest of their life, or face unnecessary surgical procedures. This is the ideal outcoe and this should not be a controversial statement. What other area would parents be called bigots for wanting their offspring to reconcile to a healthy body as a first line of “treatment”? Or to be comfortable with their same sex orientation? We are living in the upside down.

Notice the quote, below, also includes the sentence includes both “Gender identity” and “Gender Expression”. I have yet to see a satisfactory, definition that explains why these terms are deemed to describe distinct phenomenon.

The MOU does state that it is permissible to access therapy to reconcile conflict about your sexuality, or gender. The question is how is this possible if therapists are too afraid to explore it? This doesn’t square with the idea it is harmful to seek the path of least medicalisation. Being gay doesn’t set you on a lifelong dependence on #BigPharma it also doesn’t mean you are born wrong, and definitely not in the wrong body. The exemptions the BPS do emphatise, below, are in respect of exploratory work to enable “trans” patients to access hormones or other medical treatments. Why no similiar exemption for patients who may be having trouble accepting their homosexuality?

Next up I will look at the guidelines quoted below. I have had a sneak preview of the latest ones and an earlier guide from 2012. In 2012 the summary guidance is scant on details. However both the 2012 guidance and the 2017 (updated 2019) are clearly driven by the involvement of prominent Trans Activists / proponents of Queer Theory. It appears to have taken less than a decade for the BPS to go full Gender Identity ideology compliant. The details of the guidance will be on my next blog which lists the many familiar names who have corrupted the BPS.

Here are a list of the signatories. I will just pick out a few. Jay Stewart, from Gendered Intelligence jumped out: A keen proponents of Queer Theory /Gender Identity Ideology. Gendered Intelligence are infamous for producing a guide to trans sex, for youth, which contained this gem.

I could have sworn it was Gendered Intelligence which produced a guide, to terminology, which claimed “vagina” for “transwomen”and relegated women’s vaginas to “front holes”. I couldn’t find that clip but if anyone has it let me know and I will add it.

The British Association for Counselling & Psychotherpy (BACP) also signed. The BACP regulate University courses in this area so Universities have to comply or they won’t have their courses accredited. The BACP also published a document which seemed to have difficulty including working class women, from the North of England, in their definition of a female gender identity. For more on this look at the #TransNorthern on twitter. We women, of the North, had a lot of fun with that one.

More worryingly, one of the signatories was the Medical director of NHS England. .

And here are the final signatures together with their supporters and it includes union members and the Royal College of ~~Genderal~~ oops General Practitioners.

Finally our old friends Stonewall. 👆.

Has there ever beeen an organisation that has trashed its reputation more thoroughly, in less than a decade, than Stonewall UK?

paypal.me/STILLTish

Researching Gender Identity Ideology and its impact on Women and our Gay Youth. Support is always appreciated (I have no income). All my content is open access so if you can’t speak publicly, and want to support those who can, only IF you have spare cash, this helps me keep going.

£10.00

Smith is confusing a retaliatory /defensive strategy for a pre-emptive strike.

Share this:

Like this:

Share this:

Like this:

Share this:

Like this:

Share this:

Like this:

Dan Karasdic likens the work to previous research done by Evangelical Christians and then follows up with a claim the detransitioners were “never really trans”

Share this:

Like this:

DISSENTING VOICES.

Freedom of expression around diversity guidelines

SIGNATORIES. (Some names are witheld)

BPS RESPONSE TO THE LETTER

Share this:

Like this:

Part 4 : The 2019 guidelines.

The authors/contributors.

What changed in the new Guidelines?

Who is covered by the prohibition of Conversion Therapy?

Social Engineering.

Next up: THE 2019 guidance and some dissenting voices from within the BPS membership.

Share this:

Like this:

Unsuprisingly some prominent people from the UK main Gender Identity Clinic / Trans Activists were involved. ⇓

Sexual Identities.

BDSM (Bondage, Discipline, Sadism & Masochism).

“Sex Work”.

Cultural appropriation: Lesbians

Gender Performance.

Next up: THE 2019 guidance and some dissenting voices from within the BPS membership.

Share this:

Like this:

Dr H. Eli Joubert

Dr Claudio Pestano

Dr Joanna Semlyen

Gay/Gender Identity: Conversion Therapy

To avoid transmission of the POMO virus please wear a Mask?

Share this:

Like this:

Finally our old friends Stonewall. 👆.

Has there ever beeen an organisation that has trashed its reputation more thoroughly, in less than a decade, than Stonewall UK?

Share this:

Like this: